si'.':; '■')■
W:
■JUV;
J
ijiHiijl^LL
< ^.
rE"
t
.A ?<\^'?.^.v \«*'\v\o
"Hn
Given By
TT. <^, 5^T7PT OFDOrTTT^/nRNTf;
3^
^ , -stents Department
^flnlostisation'- is ^
lKm*"
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
HEARINGS T^^-T?-
BEFORE A *** •MatmmAay
SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS
UNITED STATES SENATE
EIGHTY-FIRST CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
PUKSUANT TO
S. Res. 231
A RESOLUTION TO INVESTIGATE WHETHER THERE ARE
EMPLOYEES IN THE STATE DEPARTMENT
DISLOYAL TO THE UNITED STATES
PART 1
MARCH 8, 9, 13, 14, 20, 21, 27, 28, APRIL 5, 6, 20, 25, 27, 28,
MAY 1, 2, 3, 4, 26, 31, JUNE 5, 6. 7, 8, 9, 12, 21, 22, 23, 26, 28, 1950
Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Relations
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
HEARINGS
BEFORE A
SUBCOMMITTEE OE THE
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS
^ UNITED STATES SENATE
EIGHTY-FIRST CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
PURSUANT TO
S. Res. 231
A RESOLUTION TO INVESTIGATE WHETHER THERE ARE
EMPLOYEES IN THE STATE DEPARTMENT
DISLOYAL^TO THE UNITED STATES
PART 1
MARCH 8, 9, 13, 14, 20, 21, 27, 28, APRIL 5, 6. 20, 25, 27, 28,
MAY 1, 2, 3. 4, 26, 31, JUNE 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 12, 21, 22, 23, 26, 28, 1950
Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Relations
UNITED STATES
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
68970 WASHINGTON : 1950
fff^&h
U. S. SUPER1NT€NDENT OF DOCUMENTS
JUL 251950
■A¥-
I
Hi-. 4-/1 1 ■fC
fit. I
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS
TOM CONNALLY, Texas, Chairman
WALTER F. GEORGE, Georgia ARTHUR H. VANDENBERG, Michigan
ELBERT D. THOMAS, Utali ALEXANDER WILEY, Wisconsin
MILLARD E. TYDINGS, Maryland H. ALEXANDER SMITH, New Jersey
CLAUDE PEPPER, Florida BOURKE B. HICKENLOOPER, Iowa
THEODORE FRANCIS GREEN, Rhode Island HENRY CABOT LODGE, JR., Massachusetts
BRIEN McMAHON, Couuocticut
J. W. FULBRIGHT, Arkansas
FRANCIS O. WILCOX, Chief of Staff
C. C. O'DAY, Clerk
Subcommittee on Senate Resolution 231
MILLARD E. TYDINGS, Maryland, Chairman
THEODORE FRANCIS GREEN, Rhode Island BOURKE B. HICKENLOOPER, Iowa
BRIEN McMAHON, Connecticut HENRY CABOT LODGE, JR., Massachusetts
Edward P. jMougan', Chief Counsel
ROBERT L. Heald, Assistant Counsel Robert Morris, Assistant Counsel
William J. Klima, Assistant Counsel Lyon l. Tyler, Jr, Assistant Counsel
MARGARET B. BuCHHOLz, Subcommittee Clerk
11
CONTENTS
Testimony of — I'as®
Bielaski, Frank Brooks, president of the Research and Security
Corporation, New York City 923-967
Bess, Demaree, associate editor of the Saturday Evening Post 796-797
Browder, Earl Russell 669-707
Brunauer, Esther Caukin, Assistant Director for Policv Liaison,
UNESCO Relations Staff, State Department ' 293-314
Budenz, Louis Francis, assistant professor of economics at Fordham
University 487-558
Dodd, Dr. Bella V., attorney, New York City 631-659
Field, Frederick Vanderbilt 709-735
Ford, Peyton, assistant to the Attorney General 1054
Hanson, Haldore, chief of technical cooperation projects staff. State
Department 341-371, 1179-1180
Heald, Robert L., assistant counsel, Foreign Relations Subcommittee. 1206-
1207
Hitchcock, Robert M., attorney, Buffalo, N. Y 1001-1051
Holmes, Gen. Julius C, Foreign Service officer, assigned as Minister, in
London 1 165-1 1 78
Hoover, J. Edgar, Director, Federal Bureau of Livestigation 326-339
Jaffe, Philip J., former editor of Amerasia magazine 1213-1227
Jessup, Philip C, Ambassador at Large, State Department 215-275
Kenyon, Dorothy, attorney. New York City 176-214
Kerley, Larry E., reporter, New York Journal American 660-667
Ladd, D. Milton, assistant to the Director, Federal Bureau of Investi-
gation 1053- 1 074
Larsen, Emmanuel S., former employee of State Department 1075-
1123, 1125-1164
Lattimore, Owen, director of the Walter Hines Page School of Inter-
national Relations at Johns Hopkins Universitv 417-
486, 799-871, 873-921
McCarthy, Senator Joseph R 1-32, 33-72, 73-108, 109-175, 277-292
McGrath, J. Howard, the Attorney General 315-326
Mclnernev, James AI., Assistant Attorney General in Charge of the
Criminal Division, Department of Justice- 971-999, 1001-1051, 1053-1074
Morris, Robert, assistant counsel. Foreign Relations Subcommittee _ 967-970
Nichols, L. B., Assistant Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation. _ 1053-
1074
Nicholson, Donald L., Chief of the Division of Security, State Depart-
ment 373-390
Peurifov, John E., Deputy Under Secretary of State, in Charge of
Administration " 1229-1256
Richardson, Seth W., Chairman, Civil Service Loyalty Review Board. 405-
416
Service, John S., Foreign Service officer. State Department 1257-
1349, 1351-1390, 1391-1453
Snow, Gen. Conrad E., Chairman, Loyalty and Security Board, State
Department 391-404
Thorpe, Brig. Gen. Elliott R., United States Army, retired 558-568
Tvler, Lvon L., Jr., assistant counsel. Foreign Relations Subcom-
"mitteel 1206-1210
Utley, Freda, author 737-796
Van Beuren, Archbold, former Director of Security, OSS 1185-1206
Vardaman, James K., member of Federal Reserve Board 1181-1184
III
IV
CONTENTS
SCHEDULE OF EXHIBITS
Number and summary of exhibits
Intro-
duced at
page-
Appears
on
page—
1. Protest in Daily Worker, Veterans of Abraham Lincoln Brigade
2. Letterhead, National Council of American-Soviet Friendship,
Inc
3. This exhibit was not received by reporter but was described by
Senator McCarthy as "a cordial invitation to attend a dinner
and presentation of the first annual award of the American-
Russian Institute to President Franklin Roosevelt for
'Furthering American-Soviet Relations' " (transcript, p. 26).
4. Letterhead, Conference on Pan-American Democracy
5. Letterhead, Political Prisoners Bail Fund Committee
6. Open letter to the New York Times, Schappes Defense Com-
mittee
7. Daily Worker, February 10, 1938, Isaac's Stand on Gerson
8. Letterhead, League of Women Shoppers
9. Letterhead, American Committee for Anti-Nazi Literature
10. Letterhead and Attachment, American Committee for Democ-
racy and Intellectual Freedom
11. Letterhead, Citizens Committee to Aid Striking Seamen
12. Letterhead, Film Audiences for Democracy
13. List of officers and advertising board of Films for Democracy, _
14. Program, Greater New York Emergency Conference on Inali-
enable Rights
15. Open letter to the New York Times supporting Communist
cause in Spain
16. Letterhead, Lawyers Committee on American Relations with
Spain
17. Letterhead, Milk-Consumers Protective Committee
18. Statement of Senator McCarthy on Haldore Hanson
19. State Department departmental announcement No. 41
20. McCarthy's statement on Esther Caukin Brunauer
21. Program of Washington meeting of the American Friends of
the Soviet Union
22. Call of the American Youth Congress in 1938
23. The American Union for Concerted Peace Efforts
24. The New York Times' release on The American Union for
Concerted Peace Efforts
25. Proceedings Congress of Youth
26. Senator McCarthy's statement on Owen Lattimore
27. Letterhead of Amerasia magazine
28. Times Herald of June 6, 1946, How Come by Frank C. Wal-
drop
29. Invitation for Membership, Institute of Pacific Relations
30. Program, National Emergency Conference for Democratic
Rights.
31. Writers Congress, 1943 program and list
32. Senator McCarthy's statement on Gustavo Duran
33. Spruille Braden's letter, dated Habana, December 21, 1943-
34. Intelligence report by Edward J. Ruff
35. Senator McCarthy's statement on John S. Service
36. Letterhead, Testimonial to Ellis Island Hunger Strikers
37. Letterhead, China Aid Counsel of American League for Peace
and Democracy
38. Letterhead, African Aid Committee
39. Call to a national conference on American policy in China
and the Far East
40. Summons to a congress on Civil Rights
41. Statement of American educators
42. Invitation to a dinner for Henrv A. Wallace in New York,
Sept. 12, 1949 1
43. Statement callinLf for reinstatement of L^niversity of Wash-
ington professors
18
20
71
71
72
72
75
75
83
83
86
91
91
91
92
92
93
100
103
104
110
120
122
1.30
144
144
144
144
144
144
144
144
1485
1486
26
1487
31
1487
66
1488
67
1488
69
1493
70
1494
71
1495
71
1495
71
1498
71
1499
71
1499
1500
1504
1506
1507
1508
1512
1514
1514
1515
1518
1519
1520
1523
1532
1532
1534
1535
1536
1542
1548
1548
1549
144
145
145
147
1.50
154
157
159
CONTENTS
SCHEDULE OF EXHIBITS— Continued
Number and summary of exhibits
Intro-
duced at
page-
Appears
on
page —
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.
63.
64.
65.
66.
67.
68.
69.
70.
71.
72.
73.
74.,
75.
76.
77.
78.
Advertisement for Culture and the Crisis, League of Profes-
sional Groups for Foster and Ford
List of oflk'crs and members of the National Citizens Political
.\etion Committee -.^
Daily Worker, Apr. 16, 1947, Notables Defend Communists'
Rights
Press release of National Wallace-for- President Committee _-
The text of an open letter calling for greater unity of the
ant i-Fascist forces
Clipping from Daily News, Feb. 14, 1940, Plot To Wreck
Labor Party Exposed
Dorothy Kenvon's letter to Alex Rose, State secretary, Ameri-
can Labor Party, dated Oct. 10, 1939 1
New York Times, May 26, 1941, open letter to President
Committee To Defend America by Aiding the Allies
Voice of America radio monitor of Russian broadcasting,
Russia Has Freest Women On Earth
Letter in New York Times, Feb. 16, 1946, Columbia Professors
Ask Declaration To Aid UNO Commission
Dr. Jessup's letter, ]Mar. 24, 1950, with attached list of in-
diyiduals at round table discussion in Department of State,
Oct. 6, 7, and 8, 1949
List of Esther Caukin Brunauer's publications
E.sther Caukin Brunauer presents testimonial letters
Letter from American Association of University Women to
Senator Tydings
Statenient of duties of Haldore Hanson with the Department
of State 1942 to date
Text of Hanson letter to Senator Tydings, Mar. 24, 1950
Chart, Chain of command for personnel security
Chart, enforcing the President's loyalty program
Chart, screening civil-service applicants (since October 1947).
Chart, screening non-civil-service and Foreign Service appli-
cants
Chart, eliminating security risks
Chart, composition of Loyalty and Security Board, Depart-
ment of State
Chart, State Department Loyalty and Security Board, pro-
cedures for handling cases
Biographical notes on members of State Department Loj^alty
Board
Letter to President Roosevelt from Chiang Kai-shek, Jan. 12,
1942, re: Owen Lattimore
Minutes of fourth meeting of Arctic Research Laboratory
Advisory Board, May 17, 18, 19, 1949 1_
An analysis of ;\Ir. Alfred E. Kohlberg's charges against the
Institute of Pacific Relations
Comparison of McCarthy's and Kohlberg's charges
Program, a Conference on Democratic Rights, June 14, 15,
^ 1940, at Bahimore, Md
Excerpts from letters and telegrams from scholars with a pro-
fessional knowledge of Owen Lattimore 's work
.Disaster in China by James F. Kearney, Columbia, Septem-
ber 1949
China's Communists Told Me by Philip J. Jaffe, October 12,
1937
China's Part in the Coalition War by T. A. Bisson, June 7,
1944
Draft of Louis F. Budenz' article for Collier's magazine
Daily Worker, April 29, 1949, Situation in Asia, by Owen
Lattimore
144
144
144
144
144
177
183
184
187
268
293
297
299
311
371
371
375
370
378
381
382
383
383
392
422
423
425
425
432
437
499
499
499
508
521
160
160
165
166
167
1555
1557
1558
1560
1561
1561
1562
1563
1582
1584
1587
1589
1590
1591
1592
1593
1594
1595
1596
1602
1603
1612
1641
1646
1648
1660
1665
1670
1677
1683
VI
CONTENTS
SCHEDULE OP EXHIBITS— Continued
Number and summary of exhibits
Intro-
duced at
page-
Appears
on
page—
79. Group of testimonial letters re Dr. Dodd
80. New York Herald Tribune, Double Trouble in Asia
81. Letter to Senator Tydings from Demaree Bess, April 7, 1950_
82. Telegram from Edith Chamberlain Field to Mr. Abe Fortas,
April 26, 1950
83. Transcript of hearing re John Santo
84. List of contributors to Pacific Affairs March 1934 to June 1941 _
85. Signers of letters from people who know Owen Lattimore's
work
86. Minutes of meeting of Fighting Funds for Finland, Inc. Feb-
ruary 20, 1940
87. Quotations from Owen Lattimore's writings
88. Attack on Owen Lattimore in Communist Press, April 1949- -
89. Emmanuel S. Larsen's draft of Plain Talk Article
90. Brooks Atkinson's article in New York Times, October 31,
1944
636
763
797
803
812
817
825
832
880
881
1118
1290
1685
1689
1689
1691
1691
1725
1730
1733
1734
1735
1739
1753
SUPPLEMENTAL DATA
Page
Letter to Hon. Millard E. Tydings from Austin W. Wood, vice president
and general manager of the News Publishing Co., Wheeling, W. Va.,
dated March 25, 1950, relative to newspaper account of Wheeling speech
of Senator McCarthy 1756
Clippings from the Wheeling (W. Va.) Intelligencer, Friday, February 10,
1950, concerning McCarthy's charges that Reds Hold United States
Jobs 1756
Clipping from the Nevada State Journal (Reno, Nev.) February 12, 1950,
McCarthy Blasts State Department 1757
Affidavit of Paul A. Myers, as program director of radio station WWVA
dated April 25, 1950, relative to tape recording of Wheeling speech of
Senator McCarthy 1 758
Tape recording of Senator Joseph McCarthy's speech given on February 9,
1950, at Wheeling, W. Va 1759
Affidavit of James K. Whitaker, as news editor of radio station WWVA
dated April 25, 1950, relative to tape recording of Wheeling speech of
Senator McCarthy 1763
Tape recording of Senator McCarthy's speech given on February 9, 1950, at
Wlieehng, W. Va 1763
Subpena to Dean H. Acheson, Secretary of State, Department of State, to
appear before the subcommittee established by the Committee on
Foreign Relations of the United States on April 4, 1950, at 10:30 a. m__ 1767
Subpena to J. Howard McGrath, Attorney General, to appear before the
subcommittee established bv the Committee on Foreign Relations of the
United States on April 4, 1950, ab 10:30 a. m 1768
Subpena to Harry B. Mitchell, Chairman, Civil Service Commission, to
appear before the subcommittee established by the Committee on
Foreign Relations of the United States on April 4, 1950, at 10:30 a. m__ 1769
Letter to Hon. Millard E. Tydings from Peyton Ford, Deputy Attorney
General, dated June 16, 1950, contained list of State Department files
made available to the subcommittee 1770
Memoranda concerning data extracted from the State Department loyalty
files relative to 108 individuals. These memoranda were prepared in
1947 by investigators for a subcommittee of the House Committee on
Appropriations of the Eightieth Congress. These individuals are
identified only by numbers 1771
Employment data on persons mentioned by Senator McCarthy during
appearances before the subcommittee of the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee and on the floor of the Senate 1813
CONTENTS VII
SUPPLEMENTAL DATA— Continued
Page
Letter to Hon. Millard Tydings from John E. Peurifoy, Deputy Under
Secretary, dated June 19, 1950, enclosing the following State Depart-
ment press releases, which are set out in full thereafter 1818
Press release No. 491, May 12, 1950, State Department analysis of
Senator McCarthy's speech to the American Society of Newspaper
Editors " 1818
Press release No. 501, May 15, 1950. State. Department's analysis of
Senator McCarthy's speech at Atlantic City 1825
Press release No. 529, May 20, 1950. State Department's analysis of
Senator McCarthy's speech at Chicago 1826
Press release No. 549, May 25, 1950. State Department's analysis of some
of the factual inaccuracies in the speech delivered by Senator Joseph R.
McCarthy at Atlantic City, May 15, 1950, to the Sons of the American
Revolution 1834
Press release No. 553, INIay 2G, 1950. State Department's comment on
Senator McCarthy's speech at Rochester, N. Y 1840
Press release No. 558, May 27, 1950. Department of State's analysis of
some of the factual inaccuracies in the speech delivered by Senator
Joseph R. McCarthy at Rochester, N. Y., on May 25, 1950, to the
National Convention of the Catholic Press Association of the United
States 1841
Press release No. 614, June 9, 1950. Department of State's comment on
Senator ^McCarthy's statement that a i^hotostat he produced on the
Senate floor June 6, constituted proof that three men individually listed
by the FBI as Communist agents in 1946 are still working in the De-
partment 1845
Memorandum No. 19, September 21, 1948 — to all executive departments and
agencies from Seth W. Richardson, Chairman, Loyalty Review Board.
Subject: Classification according to section 3, part III, of E. O. 9835 of
organizations previously designated by the Attorney General as within
the purview of the Executive order 1848
Memorandum No. 43, April 25, 1949 — to all executive departments and
agencies from Seth W. Richardson, Chairman, Loyalty Review Board.
Subject: Attorney General's letter of April 21, 1949, listing additional
organizations designated under and classified in accordance with section 3,
part III of Executive Order 9835 1851
Memorandum No. 44, July 21, 1949 — to all executive departments and
agencies from Seth W. Richardson, Chairman, Loyalty Review Board.
Subject: Certain organizations and groups connected with organizations
previouslv designated and classified by the Attorney General under sec-
tion 3, part III of Executive Order 9835 1853
Memorandum No. 49, September 27, 1949— to all executive departments
and agencies from Seth W. Richardson, Chairman, Loyalty Review
Board. Subject: Attorney General's letter of September 26, 1949, con-
cerning change in name of an organization designated and classified
under section 3, part III of Executive Order 9835 1853
Letter to Robert L. Heald, assistant counsel, Foreign Relations Subcom-
mittee, from Conrad E. Snow, Chairman, Loyalty Security Board, dated
June 23, 1950, setting out current statistics on loyalty program 1854
Letter to Hon. Millard E. Tydings from Stephen Brunauer, dated May 8,
1950. Enclosed was (1) a statement which Brunauer wrote about him-
self; and (2) a file of testimonial letters— with a copy of his request for
the letters; and (3) a copy of the statement about Brunauer w^hich was
released by the Navv Department on March 13, 1950 1855
Letter to Hon. Millard Tydings from John E. Peurifoy, Deputy Under
Secretary, dated July 6, 1950, relative to appointment of Dr. Harlow
Shapley' 1864
Letter to Edward P. Morgan, chief counsel. Senate Foreign Relations Sub-
committee, from Gustavo Duran, enclosing an affidavit dated May 10,
1950 1865
Letter to Mr. Edward P. Morgan, chief counsel, Senate Foreign Relations
Subcommittee, from Harlow Shapley, dated May 9, 1950, enclosing copies
of two statements issued publicly by him, dated April 7 and 22, 1950 — 1870
Letter to Mr. Edward P. Morgan, chief counsel, Senate Foreign Relations
Subcommittee, from Frederick L. Schuman dated May 9, 1950 1873
VIII CONTENTS
SUPPLEMENTAL DATA— Continued
Page
Letter to Mr. Edward P. Morgan, chief counsel, Senate Foreign Relations
Subcommittee, from Mary Jane Keeney, dated May 15, 1950 1874
Two letters to Mr. Edward P. Morgan, chief counsel, Senate Foreign Rela-
tions Subcommittee, from Loviis Francis Budenz dated May 3 and 5,
1950 1874
Letter to Hon. Millard E. Tydings from Peyton Ford, Deputy Attorney
General dated June 22, 1950, relative to Father Kearney 1876
Letter to Edward P. Morgan, chief counsel. Senate Foreign Relations Sub-
committee, from James M. Mclnerney, Assistant Attorney General,
dated May 26, 1950, relative to testimony of Mr. Budenz 1876
Letter to Hon. Millard E. Tydings from CarHsle H. Humelsine, Acting
Deputy Under Secretary, dated July 3, 1950, relative to Mr. Haldore
Hanson 1877
Letter to Hon. Millard E. Tydings from W. L. Holland dated April 15,
1950, enclosing alphabetical list of names of the people that signed a
statement concerning Owen Lattimore's character, loyalty, etc 1877
Letter to Mr. Edward P. Morgan, chief counsel, Senate Foreign Relations
Subcommittee, from Paul A. Porter, dated May 11, 1950, enclosing
copies of Owen Lattimore's correspondence to the Soviet Ambassador
and the Chief of State of the Mongolian People's Republic in 1947, as
well as copies of correspondence with Dr. Walther Heissig 1879
Letter to Mr. Edward P. Morgan, chief counsel, Senate Foreign Relations
Subcommittee, from Adrian S. Fisher, the legal adviser of the Depart-
ment of State dated June 22, 1950, concerning the part of the State
Department had in financing three Mongolian scholars at Johns Hopkins
University, enclosing copy of the contract of agreement between United
States and Johns Hopkins University 1892
Letter from Department of Justice to Senator Tydings concerning affidavits
turned over to the FBI by Senator McCarthy 1895
Material inserted in the record at the request of Mrs. Freda Utley 1897
Chronology of events furnished the Senate Foreign Relations Subcom-
mittee by Mr. Charles Edward Rhetts, attorney for John S. Service 1902
Two letters to Hon. Millard E. Tydings from C. E. Rhetts, attorney for
John S. Service, dated June 27, 1950, concerning press item on Admiral
Nimitz and information relative to statements of General Hurley 1905
A carbon copy of the memorandum, The Stilwell Affair and Hurley's
Appointment, recovered in the offices of Amerasia 1912
Letter to Hon. Millard E. Tydings from Peyton Ford, Deputy Attorney
General, dated June 19, 1950, stating that the document referred to by
Senator McCarthy on June 7, 1950, was not prepared by the FBI 1913
Letter to Hon. Millard E. Tydings from John E. Peurifoy, Deputy Under
Secretary dated June 28, 1950, enclosing copies of the Department's
press releases of June 6 and June 9, 1950 1914
Letter to Hon. James E. Webb, Under Secretary of State, from John Edgar
Hoover, Director, FBI, dated June 14, 1950, wherein Mr. Hoover stated
that the comments made by Mr. Samuel Klaus, of Mr. Webb's Depart-
ment, in his report concerning the alleged FBI chart as appeared in the
newspapers, were completely erroneous 1915
Letter to Hon. Millard E. Tydings from Peyton Ford, Deputy Attorney
General dated June 13, 1950, giving information as to the dates of
various searches made by the agents of FBI of the offices of Amerasia
and the residences of the subjects in the case 1915
Office memorandum to Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation, from
D. M. Ladd, dated April 18, 1945, relative to FBI conferences with the
State and Navy Departments on the Amerasia Case 1916
Letter to Mr. Edward P. Morgan, chief counsel, Senate Foreign Relations
Subcommittee, from Mathias F. Correa dated June 13, 1950, on behalf
of the executors of the estate, submitting a photographic copy of a
portion of Mr. Forrestal's personal papers together with an affidavit
of Eugene S. Duffield who has custody of various of Mr. Forrestal's
personal papers at the present time 1916
The staff of the subcommittee submitted memoranda on interviews with
the following persons: Joseph W. Ballentine (May 19, 1950), Robert
Bannerman (May 22, 1950), William J. Donovan (May 25, 1950),
Frederick B. Lyon (May 17, 1950) and Judge Proctor (May 10, 1950) __ 1917
Information developed by the staff of the subcommittee on persons
believed to be Washington contacts of Philip Jacob Jaffe 1920
CONTENTS rX
SUPPLEMENTAL DATA— Continued
Page
Letter to lion. Millard E. Tydings from Francis P. Matthews, Department
of Navy, dated June 26, i95(), relative to Lt. Andrew Roth 1923
Letter to Hon. Millard E. Tydings from Peyton Ford, the assistant to the
Attorney General, dated May 16, 1950, stating that a copy of the
transcript of grand jury proceedings in the case United States v. Philip J.
Jaffe would be available to the Subcommittee at the Department of
Justice 1 924
Letter to Millard E. Tydings from James M. Mclnerney, Department of
Justice, dated May 10, 1950, enclosing a photostatic copy of the De-
murrer, motion to quash, and motion to suppre.ss evidence also a news-
))apor article which appeared in the September 28, 1945 issue of the
Evening Star entitled ''Larsen Charges FBI Made Illegal Search of
Home for United States Files" 1924
A certified record of official court reporter of proceedings before Justice
Proctor on September 29, 1945, Case of Lnited States v. Philip Jacob
Jaffe 1933
A certified record of official court reporter of proceedings before Justice
Proctor on November 2, 1945, Case of United States v. Emtnanuel S.
Larsen 1937
Letter to Hon. Millard E. Tydings from Peyton Ford, Deputy Attorney
General, dated June 19, 1950, relative to corporate status of Amerasia.. 1939
Letter to ]\Ir. James J. Mclnerney, Assistant Attorney General, from Rev.
Robert C. Hartnett, S. J., Editor of America, dated June 26, 1950,
enclosing a clipping of Mr. Mclnerney's letter as it appeared in America
for July 1, in regard to documents in the Amerasia case 1940
Letter to Mr. Edward P. Morgan, chief counsel. Senate Foreign Relations
Subcommittee from James M. Mclnerney, Assistant Attorney General,
dated June 29, 1950, enclosing a mimeographed copy of the presentment
returned and filed by the special grand jury in the southern district of
New York on June 15, 1950 1 1941
Medical certificate from Luke Berardi, M. D., of Mount Vernon, N. Y.,
dated May 12, 1950, relative to John Huber 1945
Letter to Hon. Millard E. Tydings from William Foster, Acting Adminis-
trator, ECA, concerning Theodore Geiger's loyalty, dated July 5, 1950_ 1945
Incorporation by reference of a portion of the record of the hearings before
the subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate
held March 23, 1948 1945
Incorporation bj^ reference of the record of hearings before a subcommittee
of the House Committee on Expenditures in the Executive Departments,
Eightieth Congress, second session, held March 10 and 12, 1948 1945
Incorporation by reference of a portion, being pages 169 through 210 and
206 through 210, of the record of the hearings before the subcommittee
of the House Committee on Appropriations, Eightieth Congress, second
session, held January 28, 1948 1945
Incorporation by reference of the speech made on the floor of the House,
August 2,' 1948 by Congressman Jonkman, entitled "Department of
State" which appears in the Congressional Record for that date at
page 9793 1945
Letter to Mr. Edward P. Morgan, chief counsel, Senate Foreign Relations
Subcommittee, from Adrian S. Fisher, the legal advi.ser from the Depart-
ment of State dated July 10, 1950; enclosing a copy of Public Law 535
and a departmental announcement No. 41 1946
Transcript of proceedings of the Loyalty Security Board meeting in the
case of John S. Service 1958
STATE DEPAKTMENT EMPLOYEE
LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 8, 1950
United States Senate,
Committee on Foreign Relations,
Subcommittee Appointed Under Senate Resolution 231,
Washington^ D. C.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 : 30 a. m. in room
318, Senate Office Building, Senator Millard E. Tydings (chairman
of the subcommittee) presiding.
Present : Senators Tydings (chairman of the subcommittee) , Green,
McMahon, Hickenlooper, and Lodge.
Also present: Senators Connally (chairman of the full committee)
and McCarthy.
Senator Tydings. The committee will come to order.
I think it appropriate first that the record show why this committee
is meeting and what its scope and purpose is to be in these proceedings.
Senate Resolution 231, introduced by Mr. Lucas, was considered,
amended, and agreed to on February 22, 1950. The resolution reads
as follows :
Resolved, That the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, or any duly author-
ized subcommittee thereof, is authorized and directed to conduct a full and
complete study and investigation as to whether persons who are disloyal to the
United States are, or have been, employed by the Department of State. The
committee shall report to the Senate at the earliest practicable date the result
of its investigation, together with sucli recommendations as it may deem desirable,
and if said recommendations are to include formal charges of disloyalty against
any individual, then the committee, before malviiig said recommendation, shall
give said individual open hearing for the purpose of taking evidence or testimony
on said charges.
In the conduct of this study and investigation, the committee is directed to
procure by subpena and examine the complete loyalty and employment files and
records of all the Government employees in the Department of State, and such
other agencies against wliom charges have been heard.
The resolution was adopted by the Senate because of certain state-
ments made on the floor of the Senate, on Monday, February 20, 1950,
and Wednesday, February 22, 1950.
In order that the committee maj'^ have all of the evidence that it
should properly consider available in the record, the chairman has
had the pages dealing witli the information and charges and debate
on these 2 days culled from the Congressional Record and, without
objection, at this point the proceedings of the Senate dealing with this
matter will be incori)orated by reference in the record. Is there any
objection? (None.) They will be incorporated bj^ reference in the
record.
1
2 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
(The material from the Congressional Record incorporated by ref-
erence is as follows :)
Pages 2043-2071, February 20, 1950.
Pages 2104-2110, February 21, 1950.
Pages 2168-2169, 2173-2195, February 22, 1950.
Daily Digest, February 27, 1950.
Pages 2485-2486, 2523-2524, February 28, 1950.
Page 2678, March 2, 1950.
Senator Tydings. In the course of these congressional deliberations,
Senator McCarthy, of Wisconsin, made certain statements in, I be-
lieve 81 different cases, and gave a short account of why he thought
each of the cases questioned the loyalty of the individual in each case.
Senator McCarthy has been invited by the committee to come before
us today as our first witness.
I am sure, Senator, that you yourself realize that the individuals
who are charged with disloyalty to our Government are confronted
with one of the most serious charges that can be leveled at a patriotic
or other individual.
Senator McCarthy. Especially the "or other."
Senator Tydings. If these men are guilty of these charges, the com-
mittee would want to find it out. If they are not guilty, we will want
to inform the public accordingly.
Unless the chairman is overruled, all witnesses coming before this
committee will be sworn. In your own case, as a Member of the
Senate, the chairman is not going to compel you against your will to
submit to be sworn, but I Avould like to ask you now if you would
consent to be sworn.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman, I think it is an excellent idea
to SAvear all witnesses. I do not think we should have anyone take
advantage of any immunity, whether it is a Senator, Secretary of
State, or wliat, so I would like to be sworn.
Senator Tydings. I am glad you said that. Senator. That is the
way I feel about it. I think we all ought to feel that way. If you
will hold up your hand, I will proceed to swear you.
Do you promise that the evidence you shall give in the pending
matter before this committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and
nothing but the truth, so help you God ?
Senator McCarthy. I do.
Senator Tydings. Now, Senator McCarthy, the information you
presented to the Senate has been read by all of us, I am sure. You
will want to supplement that, no doubt, and comment further on it.
Senator McCarthy. That is correct.
Senator Tydings. But, before you do, there is one matter that, to
make the record complete as of the congressional debate, I would like
to ask you about for just a minute.
If you will turn to case 14, that you mentioned in the Eecord
Senator McCarthy. Do you know what page that is on, Mr. Chair-
man?
Senator Tydings. I will try to find it in a minute.
Case 14 is in the Congressional Eecord of February 20, 1950, page
2051, column 3, and page 2052, column 1. I would like to read this
particular case to ask you a question dealing with the other 81 cases.
Senator McCarthy. Certainly.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 6
Senator Tydings. I am quoting your remarks :
Case 14 : This is a case of pressure from a high State Department official to
obtain security clearance for an individual with a bad background from the
standpoint of security. He was appointed in December 1945 as a translator in
the State Department. This is an interesting case, showing the extent to which
some of their superior officers will go when they find that some of these very
unusual individuals are going to lose their jobs. He was appointed in December
194;j as a translator in the State Department. A report from another Govern-
ment investigating agency, under date of January 9, 1946, advised that the
subject should be dismissed as a bad security risk because he was flagrantly
homosexual. He had extremely close connections with other individuals with
the same tendencies and wlio were active members of Communist front organiza-
tions, including the Young Communist League.
I think this is interesting, Mr. President. I asked one of our top intelligence
men in Washington one day, "Why do you find men who are so fanatically Com-
munist? Is there something about the Communist philosophy that attracts
them?"
He said, "Senator McCarthy, if you had been in this work as long as we have
been, you would realize that there is something wrong with each one of these
individuals. You will find that practically every active Communist is twisted
mentally or physically in some way."
Senator McCarthy. Let me interrupt you there, Mr. Cliairman.
The "or physically" should not be in there. I was quoting accurately.
I do not agree with the "or pliysically." I think a vast number of
people have physical defects. I have some myself. I do not think that
makes a Communist. Let's make that clear. I wanted to make that
clear as we go through it.
Senator Tydings. It is reported in the Record. I have read the
Record as it is reported.
The State Department's own security agency recommended the discharge of
this employee on January 22, 1946.
Now this is the part to which I would like to draw your attention.
I will repeat that.
The State Department's own security agency recommended the discharge of
this employee on January 22, 1946. On February 19, 1946, this individual's
services were terminated with the State Department. Subsequently, on April 1,
1946, the action discharging this individual was rescinded and he was rein-
stated in his job in tlie State Department. In this case a CSA report of Sep-
tember 2, 1947, is replete with information covering —
and this is the point —
the attempt, of a high State Department official to induce several individuals
who had signed affidavits reflecting adversely upon the employee to repudiate
their affidavits. The file shows that that high State Department employee even
went out and personally contacted the individuals who signed the affidavits
and asked them, "Won't you repudiate them?"
This individual, according to the security files of the State Department was
a very close associate of active Soviet agents. As to whether he is in the State
Department at this time or not I frankly do not know, but in view of the fact
that he was reinstated, I assume that he is.
Now, the purpose of reading that is this. Is this man who was in
the State Department, this high State Department official whom j^ou
allege tried to doctor the records, one of the cases of the 81 that you
brought before the Senate, or have you referred to him here only to
substantiate the facts in case 14 ?
Senator McCarthy. I am afraid, Mr. Chairman, that you will have
to let me go through these cases as I have them documented, and we
will get to that case. I think we will have to wait until we get
4 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
to that case, and I can assure you we will get to it. I have other
cases documented for your information this morning. I am going
to ask the committee to do this, if I may. As I discuss one case, let's
try and stick to that case, and I assure you we will get to all of them
without any trouble at all. I will be unable to jump, say, from case 1
to case 72 back to case 58. As of this time I can assure the Chairman
that all the information which he wants on case No. 57 will be gotten to
him, but I frankly cannot give him that information now, because I
haven't arrived at that case this morning. I am sure we won't get
to that case this morning.
Senator Tydixgs. Just a minute. Just a minute. Just a minute!
All I am askino- you is this. This is a very serious charge
Senator McCarthy. Very serious.
Senator Tydings. That a high official in the State Department is
tampering with the records to protect people who are charged with
disloyal activities.
Senator McCarthy. That is right.
Senator Tydings. What I would like to know is this : Is he one of
the cases that you are going to bring before this committee, or is he
just incidental in this case^ You can certainly tell me that.
Senator McCarthy. I will bring his name before the committee and
give the committee all the information.
Senator Lodge. I would like to express the hope that Senator Mc-
Carthy will get the courtesy everyone gets, of being able to make his
own statement in his own way, and then be subject to questioning.
Senator Tydings. The only reason I am bringing this out now is,
we want to hear Senator McCarthy. We have put this all in the
record. I have read over all of these cases three or four times, and
studied the possible ramifications of them. I would like to know
whether we are to hear this as a collateral matter of pi'oving case 14,
or whether this man himself is to be charged with disloyal conduct
as a separate case. You can certainly answer that, and then we can
leave it.
Senator McCarthy. I will answer that. I will give the committee
all of the information which I have. If the committee decides this
man is disloyal, all right. If they decide not, it is up to the com-
mittee. There will be no information held back from the committee,
and I want to thank the Senator from Massachusetts very much. I
would like to be allowed to proceed and present the information in an
orderly fashion, and the committee can be sure that any questions
they have to ask will certainly be answered. I will answer that ques-
tion. Senator, that you will be given all the information on the case.
Senator Tydings. Let me ask the questions, Senator McCarthy. I
am at least charged with the responsibility of conducting this hearing,
and I prefer to conduct it as I want it conducted and as the conmiittee
wants it conducted, rather than to have you tell me how to conduct it.
I will be glad, and we will give you full and free opportunity to
present anything you want to present.
All I am asking you now is, do you know the name — I do not want
you to tell it — but do you know the name of this particular high State
Department official who is allegedly aiding disloyal persons in the
State Department ? Do you know the name ?
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman, when we get to case No. 57 I
will give you all of the names in that case. No names will be held back.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 5
There are any number of names. I frankly cannot remember the vast
number of names.
Senator Tydings. Yon know whether you know the name or not,
and you can answer "Yes" or "No" and we can end this right here.
Senator Lodge. I do not think we ought to put the witness in the
position of answering "Yes" or "No." I think he has a right to
develop his own statement in his own way, and then be subject to
questioning, which is a normal procedure here.
Senator Tydings. I would like to ask him now, Do you or do you
not know the name of this high official in the State Department who
allegedly committed the very thing that I have read ?
Senator McCarthy. Senator, I can go back to my office and dig up
the name. I am not prepared to testify in case No. 57 this morning.
I was sure we would not get to case No. 57. When we get to it, the Sen-
ator will have all of the information which I have. I assure him of
that. And I hope that then he takes advantage of that and completes
the investigation.
Senator Tydings. Senator McCarthy, if you will listen to me a
moment, I think you and I probably can arrive at an understanding.
Senator McCarthy. I am sure we can.
Senator Tydings. You have made on the floor of the Senate state-
ments concerning 81 individuals. That is all right. The reason I
am interested in this case particularly is that in no other case that I
recall, and I read them all several times, is there any allegation that
any high official in the State Department is covering up disloyal activi-
ties or disloyal persons. This was the only case where that happened.
Now if we have such an individual in the State Department, and
we may have — I don't know whether we have or not — the most im-
portant thing this committee could do right away to clean out any
subversive elements in the State Department is to find out who this
man is, and we don't want you to give his name in public, but find out
who he is and get him out of there. We don't want to wait until case
57 or 86 or next week. We certainly don't want somebody high up
in the State Department who is shielding disloyal persons, fixing their
records and asking people to withdraw their comments.
Now if this were just an ordinary matter of one individual, that
would be one thing. But I cannot think of anything more important
in this whole hearing. ^Nlaybe this is true or false, I don't know.
But I would like to know if you know the name of this man. Then
we will go on and let you testify.
Senator McCarthy. A very good question, Mr. Chairman, and I
tried to explain to you that 1 cannot give you information now on
case No. 57.
Senator Tydings. I said case 14.
Senator ^IcCarthy. Let me answer when you ask a question, please.
Let me add tliis, too. If you are eager fo get to that case today,
when the testimony ends this morning if you will come to my office I
will dig that case out and give you all the names in the file, all the
information you want. I cannot give you testimony on case No. 57
because I have prepared cases which I think are more important. I
hope the connnittee will try and take the information which I have.
I have it available for you. As I say, if the chairman feels that case
No. 57 is urgent, he can come right over to m}' office as soon as we get
6 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
through and he and the reporter can take all of the information on
case No. 57, but that is all I can tell 3^ ou on that now.
Senator Tydings. Senator McCarthy, we do not want to go to your
office. We are conducting a hearing.
Senator McCarthy. You will have to wait, then, until I get the
information over here, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Tydings. You are in the position of being the man who oc-
casioned this hearing, and so far as I am concerned in this committee
you are going to get one of the most complete investigations ever
given in the history of this Republic, so far as my abilities will permit.
Now what I am asking you now is, Do you or do you not now know
the name of this man? Don't tell me. Do you now know it?
Senator McCarthy. At this particular moment, Mr. Chairman, I
could not give you the names of half of these.
Senator Tydings. I did not ask you if you could give me the names.
I asked you if you knew this name.
Senator McCarthy. ]Mr. Chairman, I cannot give you any informa-
tion on case 57. Have I made that clear ? Case No. 57 will be devel-
oped and you will get all the information, every name that is in this
file, when I get to that case.
Senator Lodge. Mr. Chairman, this is the most unusual procedure
I have seen in all the years I have been here. Why cannot the Sena-
tor from Wisconsin get the normal treatment and be allowed to make
his statement in his own w^ay, aiid not be cross questioned like this be-
fore he has had a chance to present what he has ?
Senator Tydings. If the Senator from Massachusetts will listen to
me, what I have already put in the record are the 81 cases that the
Senator from Wisconsin brought to the attention of the Senate and
the country on the Senate floor. Now I asked him first whether this
particular individual was one of tlie 81 cases. He did not seem able
to tell me that, although I thought it was the most important allega-
tion of disloyalty in the whole 81 cases.
I then, in order to bring it down into focus, asked him if he could
tell me the name of this man. I did not want him to tell me here in
the open, but I wanted to know if he knew it, because it seemed to
me to be a rather odd situation that here, out of all these cases, was a
high official of the State Department who was attempting to falsify
records, suppress evidence, and pi'otect disloyal persons, and no charge
of a separate case, so far as I could find, was made out against him
as one of the things we should investigate. So before leaving these
81 cases which I have put in the record this thing attracted my atten-
tion, and sim])ly before we closed the Senate part of these hearings
I am asking the Senator, Is this man known to him so that he can
give us his name ?
If tliat is not a reasonable request, he can sfiy "Yes" or "No" or "I
will go get it for you and in executive session I will give it to you."
Senator Lodge. I think it is a perfectly reasonable request, Mr.
Cliairman, at the proper time.
I think it is the uiost important request that will be made on this
question, but I tliink this is the wrong time to make it. I think the
Senator from Wisconsin ought to have the courtesy that every Sena-
tor and every Avitness has, of making his own presentation in his own
way aud not to be pulled to ]:)iecos before he lias had a chance to utter
one siugle consecutive sentence.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 7
Senator Green. It seems to me that it is important to proceed in
this unusual manner, not only for the reason stated by the chairman
but for tliis reason : We may be asked to call upon the State Depart-
ment to ))roduce papers or evidence. It may be this very man to whom
that might be left. If there is such an individual in the State Depart-
ment suppressino- information, distorting- facts, we ought. to tend to
that before we ask the State Department for an}' papers.
Senator Lodge. Of course we ought to know it, Senator Green.
Senator Green. The question is whether the witness knows the
name or whether it was imaginary.
Senator Lodge. We ought to know that man's name; we ought to
know the names of all these people in here. All I say is that every
witness, whether he is a Senator or whether he is not a Senator, is
entitled to make his statement in his own words, and not, the minute
he sits down, be subjected to a whole lot of piece-meal questioning,
thereby making it impossible for him to make his presentation. I
think it is just common courtesy and fairness to let a man make his
presentation.
Senator Tydings. We will give him all the chance in the world to
make his statement, if he will simply say he doesn't know the name of
the man or he does know the name of the man. Certainly he can tell
us whether he knows the name or does not know it.
Senator Hickenlooper. Mr. Chairman, why is it so vital at tliis
original jump-otf meeting of this committee to know the name of an
individual man, when the witness says in due course and in the course
of his i3resentation he will give and disclose to this committee those
names ? It would seem to me that Senator McCarthy ought to be per-
mitted to present his charges, his allegations, his information, and then
this committee can look into them and evaluate which is the most im-
portant to first go into.
Senator Green. Mr. Chairman, if I may answer my distinguished
colleague's argument, it is this, that if we are going into the files of
the State Department, we ought to have confidence that they are not
furnished or handled by an individual against whom such a charge is
made as that he is a high officer in the State Department using his
power improperly, because the testimony which we may need may
come through him, and therefore we ought to clear the decks before
we proceed. Not only that, but if these charges are true, that man still
has access to the files in the meantime. That is my point.
Senator Lodge. If it were essential to do this so soon, why wasn't it
done the minute Senator McCarthy made his speech on the Senate
floor? AVhy did we wait until this "particular moment ?
Senator Ttdings. Let me say this : I have no desire to delay Senator
McCarthy. I am anxious for him to get on. My first question was, Is
this individual who is accused of fraudulent conduct in the State De-
partment to be made a case number '.
Now, it seems to me that we can find out if he is, and then that's
that. And the second question is. Does the Senator know the name
of this man ? He can say "Yes'' or "No" and that would be that and
we could get on with this thing.
Senator Lodge. I hope Senator McCarthv will be allowed to pro-
ceed in the normal way.
68970 — 50 — pt. 1 2
S STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
Senator Tydings. I still leave my two questions to be answered.
I think that the most important thing before this committee is to
clear out men in high places if they are guilty of fraudulent conduct,
suppressing evidences of disloyalty in the State Department. There
is nothing we are going to do that is more important than that.
Senator Lodge. Of course I favor doing that too. We all want
to get rid of all the rotten apples in the State Department. That is
the purpose of this investigation, and simply because I object to Sena-
tor McCarthy being torn apart this way does not mean I am not in-
terested in getting these men cleared out. But this is a most extraor-
dinary and unusual procedure, to start off in this confused way.
It is not the way things are done around here.
Senator Tydings. All he has to do is answer two very simple ques-
tions : ''I don't know the name of this man, Senator," or "I do know
the name of this man. Senator. He won't be made a case subject."
Senator Hickenlooper. How will that help the investigation at
this point, if he answers ?
Senator Lodge. If he says it at 3 o'clock this afternoon, why isn't
that just as good? You have waited all this time before you brought
it up.
Senator Tydings- This is a public hearing and I do not want too
much of this in star chamber.
Senator Lodge. Let's have it in public in Senator McCarthy's own
time and own way. Give him the courtesy of letting him make the
charges to the best advantage from his viewpoint.
Senator McMahon. As I understand it, what you want is to know
the name of this man as quickly as possible, because it is conceivable,
because of what Senator McCarthy said about him, that he could
frustrate this investigation. As I understand it, that is the purpose
of the question. It is obvious that he hasn't got it with him at the
moment. It is too bad that he hasn't, because I, too, would like to
know if this rascal is in the State Department, and if that is what he
is up to, and I hope that before the end of the day we can have
the name of this person, because I think it is pertinent. Senator, at
the beginning of this investigation, to drag out this key figure, who
is apparently, if your charge is true, right down there with his hand
on the throttle, and we ought to know that as quickly as possible.
Senator Hickenlooper. Mr. Chairman, this man has been in the
State Department, apparently, according to the statement of Senator
McCarthy, I think, on the floor, since, let us say, 1947.
Senator Tydings. And is still there.
Senator Hickenlooper. All right. He has been in the State
Department, perhaps — I do not know who he is — since Senator
McCarthy made his charges on the floor of the Senate. If he is going
to do an}^ dirty work, he has had all the time since 1947, and especially
since Senator McCarthy made his formal statement on the floor of
the Senate; he has had all that time to do whatever dirty work he
might potentially do, and I do not see that another day will add
to his potential danger very much over what he may have done in
the past, if he is guilty.
Therefore, I think Senator McCarthy ought to be able to proceed
in his own way.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 9
Senator Tydings. Just a minute. I was very hopeful that we
"Could ^et answers to these two questions. You could say "I don't
know the name of the man" or "I do know the name of the man,"
because you have said that you had photostatic copies of the files,
as I recall your testimony. And if you said you knew the man, we
weren't goin*^ to ask you to give us that name this morning. But
we just wanted to get at that the very first thing and have that man,
if he is in the State Department now, relieved of his duties pending
this investigation. We don't want to be charged with having let
him roam around the State Department where he can keep on with
doctoring the records, if he has access to them.
The first thing I asked you — the other proposition was the second —
was, Was he to be made one of the case numbers? That is, was he
to be a man against whom you were going to bring charges?
Now certainly it is very hard for the chairman to believe that a
charge of this kind would not be a case number and if it is to be a
case number, all right; say so. We will forget it. If it is not to
be a case number, then we had better look into it right away.
Senator McCarthy. May I have the chairman's copy of the reso-
lution ?
Senator Lodge. It seems to me that the time to try to get this par-
ticular individual was after Senator McCarthy mentioned him on
the floor of the Senate, rather than to wait for two whole weeks and
bring it up now this morning.
Senator Tydings. How could I get him when I don't know his name ?
Senator Lodge. At this Roman holiday we are having here this
morning it looks to me as though all of a sudden we have gotten
interested in this man, when 14 days have gone by within which
Senator McCarthy could have been asked the same question, if there
was such a terrible urgency about it. I just don't see why we can't
have procedings go along in a normal way. If Senator McCarthy
is allowed to make a statement without interruption he will probably
reach this case today sometime.
Senator Tydings. I am not so certain. He said it was No. 57. He
also said he could take up only a certain number of cases today, and
we do not know when we are going to meet again. But the point is
this : I have asked two simple questions ; one, Is this man to be made
a case number ? Do you know the name of the man ? If there is any-
thing of an inquisitorial nature about getting an answer to those two
(juestions before we proceed, I do not Know what it is. The answer
is very simple, and it seems to me that we could get the answers and
dispose of it and go on with something else.
Senator McCarthy. ]N[ay I answer the chairman, and that is, that
I will be unable to give him detailed information on case No. 57 this
morning. In order to get the complete picture of that case, he will
need the files.
Senator Tydings. You have the files.
Senator McCarthy. Just a minute. I say in order to get the de-
tailed information necessary for the committee to act it will be neces-
sary that you subpena the files. Let's make this clear when we speak
of files. If the committee wants to be sure they have the complete
files, it will be necessary to subpena a number of things.
No. 1, you will have to subpena the loyalty files, both categories, the
part that vou will normally be handed plus the sub rosa section.
10 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
No. 2, you will have to subpena the personnel files, and by that I
don't mean merely the subsection of the personnel files.
No. 3, in order to check that, it will be necessary for you gentlemen
to subpena the Civil Service Commission files. I understand that the
State Department has a loose-leaf file. The Civil Service Commission
has a cop3^ of those files, a little more intricate filing system. The
FBI also has a copy of that section of the files, which was compiled by
the FBI.
Let me say this : Every case that I am giving you gentlemen today,
every case that you will hear about, will have in the files derogatory
information developed by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
Merely the top half of the State Department's loyalty file will be
meaningless. I assure you of that.
Now this case No. 57, as I have told you three times, Senator, 1
cannot give j'ou information on that now. If you had called me
and told me you wanted that case developed this morning, it would
have been developed. The only contact that I have had with the com-
mittee was the day the chairman met me on the floor and said, "Come
over to the committee at 10 :30 Wednesday morning and present what-
ever you have to us."
I am here ready to do that, Mr. Chairman. As I say, I am not pre-
pared this morning in case No. 57. I am not prepared because the
Chair did not indicate he wanted me prepared. I am not prepared,
No. 2, because I do not think that is the all-important case. I do think
that is a very important case. All of the names — all of the names —
will be found in those files that I have suggested you subpena, so
yon can get to that very easily.
Now, if the chairman wants case No. 57, I assume he is meeting
tomorrow. If he meets tomorrow, if he wants that case developed, it
will be developed before the committee. If the committee wants to
meet this afternoon, if he wants to come to my office I will try and get
him all the information he desires on that case. But this morning I
cannot give the chairman the information on case No. 57 ; period !
Senator Tydings. Now let me ask you this : If we were to take a
recess for 10 minutes so the Senator could go to his office and refresh
his memory on file 57, if that is the file, could he not then come back
here and answer the question, to wit, (1), Is this individual against
whoni these grave charges are made to be the subject of a particular
case for investigation, or is he left out of the matter? (2), Does the
Senator know his name ?
If the Senator will come back and answer those two simple ques-
tions, we can go ahead with the procedures. It would only take him
5 or 10 minutes to do it.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman, let me say the Chair asks
whether I will make him the subject for investigation. I didn't know
that I was running this committee. I don't think I am by a long
stretch. I intend to submit to the committee information bearing upon
the disloyalty, the bad security risks, in the State Department. Then
it is up to the committee to investigate those particular cases. The
committee has been allowed, I believe, $25,000 or $50,000 to do that.
I do not have the investigative staff, I do not have access to the files, to
make any complete investigation and make any formal charges. All
I intend to do, Mr. Chairman, is to submit to the committee the evi-
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION H
dence Avliich I have gathered over painstaking months of work, and I
hope tliat the Chair will allow me to give that tomorrow, and I assure
that chairman that there ^yill be no names, nothing kept secret from
this committee. He can be sure of that.
I say, if the Chair had informed me that he was particularly inter-
ested in case No. 57, that case would have been developed this morning.
As it is, it will not be developed this morning because I am not pre-
pared to do so, and after a 10-minute recess f would not be prepared
to do so. I have some facts which I hope the committee will allow
me to present to them this morning.
Senator Tydixgs. If the Senator will allow me to read just one sen-
tence from case 1-4, he says, "In his case a CSA" — what is a "CSA" ?
Senator McCarthy. That is the investigative agency, as I under-
stand it.
Senator Ttdings. I don't know.
Senator ^McCarthy. Mr. Chairman, when you ask a question, let
me finish, please.
I don't understand this lettering system too well. "CSA" I believe
is — they change the names of the organizations over there so much
I can't keep track of them. It is the investigative agency, or some-
thing along that line.
Senator Tydings (reading) :
In this case a CSA report of September 22, 1947, is replete with information
covering the a tempt of a hiiih State Department official to induce several indi-
viduals who had signed affidavits reflecting adversely upon the employee to
repudiate their affidavits. The file shows that that high State Department em-
ployee went out and personally contacted the individuals who signed the affida-
vits and asked them "Won't you repudiate them?"
Senator INIcCarthy. Mr. Chairman, let me say this. I have quoted
from the files in 81 cases. The President of the United States has
answered merely by saying that McCarthy is lying; it is not true.
This committee can very easily determine where the truth lies by
saying "We shall get those files.'' 'V^^len you get those files, then you
will know whether or not every word I have spoken here is true.
Now, when I get to case No. 57 I will give you all of the informa-
tion which I can on it. That will not be complete. You will have to
get four separate files to make sure you have the complete case.
Senator XiUDGe. Mr. Chairman, so far as one member of this com-
mittee is concerned, speaking for myself, I do not understand what
kind of a game is being played here, and I cannot do my work as a
member of this committee if we are going to do this picking and
choosing and jumping around all over the place. If we are going to
depart from the usual procedure of having him make his charges,
then he makes his charges and we investigate the charges, I want to
know that. But I do not understand at all what is sought to be
achieved by this business of picking first one case and then another
case and asking the witness about that before he has even had a chance
to make a single connected statement.
Senator Tydings. Senator Lodge, as I will try to tell you once
more — 1 thought I had made it plain — I have no disposition to inter-
fere with the witness going ahead with any statement he has before
him. I put in the record all of the proceedings, and one of the pro-
ceedings put in the record was the one to which I have just drawn
attention, and in that particular case I found this statement. I simply
12 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATIOIM
asked the witness, to make the record complete, whether or not this
was one of the 81 cases which he wanted investigated, to wit, that a
high State Department official had tried to cook or alter or doctor the
evidence, and if he had said "Yes'' or "No," that would liave been
one thing.
Then I asked him if he knew the name of this man, thinking it
would be very desirous for the committee to get that man out of this
investigation and all contact with the papers at the earliest possible
moment.
It seems to me that if those two questions had been answered, and
I can see no reason why they could not be answered, either that they
are going to be made a case or they are not going to be made a case,
and that "I do know the name and will give it to the conunittee in
due time" or "I don't know the name and cannot give it to the com-
mittee" — if there is anything captious or inquisitorial or bad about,
just asking those two questions, to me they are tlie simplest kind of
thing, and they make the record which we have already made com-
plete as to whether this man is one of the 81 cases or whether he is
not, and that "I know his ]uime and in due time I will give it to the
committee" or "I don't know the name and I can't give it to the
committee."
Senator Lodge. If there was such an awful hurry about getting
this man, it seems to me the time to have done it would have been
immediately after Senator McCarthy raised the point on the floor of
the Senate. It is just a question here of orderly procedure.
Senator Ttdings. You do not see things on the floor of the Senate
you see when you read them over. Senator Lodge.
Senator LodCxE. AVe can all rend the Congressional Record, and, if
the thing is there, it is perfectly possible to go to work on it then,
instead of waiting for two whole weeks until we have this hearing.
It seems to me this is a perfectly extraordinary procedure. I have
never seen anything like it, and I have been here since 1937. You
have been here longer than I have. But I have been here since 10?>7,
and it is a perfectly amazing procedure to pick No. 57 and then to
pick No. 14, and I suppose after you are through playing wnth that
you will pick 23. In the meantime the witness sits here. He has a
prepared statement and he isn't given the common, ordinary courtesy
of telling his story in his own words. I think it is perfectly amazing.
I don't know what the purpose of it is, because I haven't been told.
Senator Tydimgs. There is nobody knows what the purpose is ex-
cept myself, because on my word of honor I have never discussed it
with any of my Democratic colleagues or Re]>ub]ican Colleagues. It
simply occurred to me that this was about the most serious thing I
had run across and I wanted simply to know whether a special case
was to be made out against this individual and whether the Senator
had his name, and if he had answered those questions "Yes" or "No"
lie would have been probably a third through with his written state-
ment. If there is any reason why they should not be answered I do
not know why the Senator does not say it, or say "Yes, they will be a
special case. They ought to be a special case, and in due time I will
give the committee his name." I can see no reason why that could
not be done. If there is a reason, I have not heard it.
Senator Hickenlooper. Mr. Chairman, it seems to me that in read-
ing over the Congressional Record when these cases and charges were
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 13
made by Senator McCarthy that there are quite a number of charges
of very serious importance in this whole set-up. I would not neces-
sarily pick this case as the most serious, just from reading the record.
1 tliink there are others that probably will come in for just as serious
consideration. Therefore I see no justification in picking out this
particular case for special interrogation at the moment.
And then, another thing, it seems to me that this committee will
make the cases, not necessarily Senator McCarthy. Senator Mc-
Carthy gives his evidence and gives his conclusions, and furnishes
this committee with what he believes to be facts or the sources of
the facts for investigation, and then it is up to this committee to dif-
ferentiate and to examine and to make the cases.
I strongly urge that a perfectly normal, sound procedure is to let
Senator ISIcCarthy, mIio has originated these charges, go ahead and
make his charges and canvass his situation, and then let's question
him about the individual cases if we want to.
Senator Tydings. The Chair will try to comply with the requests
of the two Republican members of the committee and he will simply
iinish this phase of the matter by asking Senator McCarthy, the next
time he comes before the committee, to be in a position to answer two
questions : First, is the "high State Department official'' Avho allegedly
attempted to doctor the loyalty records in the State Department to be
made the subject of a special case in the information and charges that
he will bring before us? Secondly, does he know the name of this
individual, and will he give it to the committee in executive session?
So, with those two things in the Senator's mind, if he will furnish
them at the next meeting, I will be glad to have him go ahead with his
statement. I am sorry we could not get them this morning.
Senator Hickenlooper. I have a question that I would like to sug-
gest to Senator McCarthy -at this time which I may ask him later — ^I
clon't know — along this same line . I may see fit to ask Senator Mc-
Carthy if he believes, based upon what knowledge and investigation
he has had, that the high State Department official which has been
referred to here might well be, upon the evidence developed, the
subject for investigation and further inquiry by this committee. I
say I may ask the Senator that question at a later date, when he is
prepared to canvass the particular case that involves this allegedly
high State Department official.
Senator Tydings. I will ask the Senator if he will be good enough to
try to bring the answers to those two questions of the committee at the
next meeting of the committee. I think I have conformed to his wish
to postpone and give him time. I would rather have had them this
morning. I think they are very important. I think it is the most
important thing in the whole investigation, and I am sorry that, it
being so important, he hasn't that evidence available.
Now, Senator, we will be glad to hear your statement.
STATEMENT OF HON. JOSEPH R. McCAETHY, UNITED STATES
SENATOR FROM WISCONSIN
Senator McCarthy. I thank the chairman, and so there is no doubt
in the committee's mind let me say this : I think this is so important
that I do want to stick to the cases as I document them and develop
14 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
tliem SO there can be no question about the absolute truth of every-
thing presented.
Let me say this also : I hope that every witness' testimony, includ-
ing mine, is gone through with a fine-tooth comb. There are some
very important witnesses down here, and I am very happy the chair-
man swore them all. We have found, you recall, back in the case
of the famous racketeers of Capone that the Government could not get
them for their crimes, but they finally discovered a way of getting
them. They got them for income tax evasion.
We find where Communists are concerned they are too clever. They
work underground too much. It is hard to get them for their criminal
activities in connection with espionage, but a way has been found.
We are getting them for perjury and putting some of the worst of
them away. For that reason I hope every witness who comes here
is put under oath and his testimony is gone over with a fine-tooth
comb, and if we cannot convict some of them for their disloyal activi-
ties, perhaps we can convict them for perjury.
Senator Tydings. Are you going to relate to cases in the same order
before the Senate, so I can follow them here?
Senator McCarthy. I intend to give the committee additional
cases.
Senator Tydings. If you refer to case 1 or case 2, that will be case 1
or case 2 as you referred to it in the Senate?
Senator McCarthy. When I refer to a case, I will also identify it by
the case number if it was referred to in the Senate.
Now, the chairman made a statement that I think he would like to
retract, because he said: "McCarthy will be subject to the most thor-
ough investigation in the history of this Republic." I think he meant
that the disloyal people in the State Department will be subject to
such investigation.
Senator Tydings. I did not say "McCarthy," I said this. I said:
"This, Senator McCarthy, will be one of the most thorough investiga-
tions * * *." I did not make it personal.
Senator McCarthy. Some people in the room got the impression
he said that.
Senator Tydings. If they got that impression they got something I
did not intend.
Senator McCarthy. I did not think he did.
Mr. Chairman, I am grateful to the committee for its invitation to
appear here today, and make available information which has come
to me from a variety of sources bearing on the security of our Nation.
Certainly we are all in accord on the premise that every possible
precaution should be taken to protect the national welfare and time
and experience has shown us that subversive and un-American actions
cannot stand the light of day.
To that end, I shall make available to this committee the names and
background of persons wlio are, or have been, in the service of the
Government who, by virtue of their background and activities, do not
deserve the confidence and trust placed in them.
The fair security risk does not exist. Every man or woman in the
employ of the United States Government is a bad or good security
risk.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 15
AVe have had, through our courts, our oovernmeiital investigatiEg
bodies, our public press and radio, a shocking and frightening serios
of reports on men and women in liigh and low places in our Govern-
ment who transferred their allegiance to a foreign and dangerous
ideology.
It is obviously impossible for me, without investigative personnel,
funds, and authority and without full and free access to the volumi-
nous and comprehensive files of numerous Government agencies, to
givt^. you gentlemen an adequate picture of this distressing situation,
I hope that this distinguished committee, charged by its colleagues
in the Senate with a diflicult and exhaustive duty, will be able to
find a solution to a hitherto insoluble j)roblem.
After the information I have received is collated and examined, it
Avill be turned over to this committee. I shall withhold nothing and
shall make available to the committee the information which has been
made available to me.
I have carefully studied the standards of loyalty, as set forth by
Secretary of State Acheson.
I agree with them wholeheartedly.
I have come to the conclusion, however, that these standards of loy-
alty are meaningless unless they are applied to all Government em-
ployees without exception.
It is the exception that I wish to bring to the attention of the com-
mittee.
I am convinced that in a sizable number of cases these standards
have not been applied properly.
JNIr. Chairman, one bad risk is too many, and a very few of these
bad risks might well be disastrous to our national security.
At the outset I think it is important that the committee know that
the statement I shall make here today regarding various persons in the
employ of the United States Government is based on documented evi-
dence and these documents I will submit to the connnittee as I go
along.
Senator McMahon. Senator, is it your intention to name individ-
uals against whom you are making charges?
Senator McCarthy. I intend to name names of those that are thor-
oughly documented and important, yes. The ones that are not thor-
oughly documented I intend to give to the committee and have the
committee, with its own investigative staff, do the documenting.
Senator McIVIahon. Senator, as I understand it, this is the first
of a series of cases in which you are going to name names.
Senator McCarthy. That is right.
Senator McMahon. And you are going to give to the public and
to us the digests of the files as you have had them given to you ?
Senator McCarthy. In this first case I am going to give nothing
from any files. I am going to present documents.
Senator McIMahon. What documents ?
Senator McCarthy. I am going to give them to you as I go along.
Senator McMahon. I mean, are they abstracts of the State Depart-
ment files?
Senator McCarthy. I will give you the documents. Senator, as I
go along. They are photostats, and I can't give you a preview. I
have to go through them.
16 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
Senator Lodge. Mr. Chairman, I don't like to be tedious about this,
but I do hope
Senator McMAHOisr. Senator, if you do not mind, I have not yielded.
There is a very important point involved here, Senator, whether
you realize it or not, and this is the point where this committee is going;
to have to consider it, as to whether or not we are going to adopt a
procedure whereby charges are made about citizens for all the world
to see, based upon material that has been taken from files without an
opportunity for the connnittee to have a full preview of that file.
Now, what I have in mind is the Coplon case and what took place
down in the district court. I have no fixed opinion on this at the
moment. Senator, but I just want the committee to understand that
apparently we are going to open up the files for public inspection.
Is that the Senator's idea ?
Senator McCarthy. No, no. I have no intention — even if I had the
files I would have no intention — of presenting any of the State De-
partment files. I say "even if I had them." It is not my decision to
conduct the hearing in this fashion. The committee has asked for
information. I have the documents. The names appear on the docu-
ments very clearly. If the committee wants to go into executive
session and take this testimony, that is entirely up to the committee.
Otherwise I shall have to proceed, and it is impossible to develop this
and say "Mr. X," "Mr. Y," "Mr. Z." Do you follow me. Senator?
If the committee wants to go into executive session and hear these
cases, let me tell you without mentioning her name that the first case
will involve a person in a high State Department position getting
about $12,000 a year who belongs to 28 organizations that have been
listed by the Attorney General and by various senatorial and House
committees as subversive or disloyal — 28 different organizations. I
have the documents to show that she has belonged to those 28 subver-
sive organizations — not organizations that I say are subversive, but
organizations that the Attorney General has said are subversive, plus
senatorial and House committees.
In presenting these documents, I think it is impossible to dismiss
or hide this individual's name. I think this is very important. We
will want to ask, for example, Mr. Acheson wh}^ he keeps in a high
position, a $12,000-a-year position, someone who belongs to 28 sub-
versive organizations. She may, you understand, belong to 10 or 12
others. I have the documents to show the membership in 28.
I have no desire whatsoever to make this name public, but the com-
mittee has called me here. They say, "Give us information," and I
can't give this information by referring to X, Y, and Z.
Senator TydinCxS. I think. Senator McMahon, your question is a
proper one, but I believe the better way to handle it would be when
we get to a document to ask for a description of it, et cetera, rather
than to try to make a blanket ruling here where we might have to
amend it over and over again. Do you agree with that, Senator? In
other words, postponing the time until the Senator gets to the docu-
ment, and then we can ascertain whether or not it is a State Depart-
ment matter or loyalty file or FBI file, or what the matter may be.
I don't think we want to get in the position of denying the witness
.any proper testimony that he might deliver.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 17
Senator McMahon. It is a very difficult question, and I would
•defer to you as chairman of this committee on this matter of proce-
dure. The only thing that disturbs me is this: Let us assmne that
the Senator charges this specific person what is true and is determined
tjo be true. Then there is certainly no reason why the public should
not be advised of the fact that she is what he says she is.
Contrariwise, let us assume, hypothetically, that it turns out on an
investigation that she is completely innocent of the charges that are
made. Senator, you and I know that that verdict will be on page 27 or
47, if there are 47 pages, but the charges will be on page 1.
Senator McCarthy. I must say I heartily agree with you.
Senator McMahon. And we must be careful, it seems to me, that in
our desire to do a thorough job of investigation here and bring to
book — and they should be brought to book — any persons who do not
belong in the Government of the United States, not, in the process
of doing that, to do a great injustice to decent American citizens.
Senator ^McCarthy. May I say that I heartily agree with the Sena-
tor. Oil the Senate floor I said that I would not divulge any names.
I said I hoped any names that were divulged would be developed in
executive session. Mr. Lucas, who is the leader of the majority party,
demanded time after time on the Senate floor and publicly that I
divulge names. I am now before the committee. In order to present
the case I must give the names, otherwise I cannot intelligibly present
it. If the committee desires to go into executive session, that is a
decision that the committee and not I can make, but if I am to testify,
I say it is impossible to do it without divulging names.
Senator Lodge. Mr. Chairman, may I get recognized now? This
committee unanimously voted to hold public hearings. That was our
decision. Senator McCarthy now has the opportunity to name names.
That is his decision. If he wants to give this information in private,
then we have to decide whether we will hear them or not. Those is-
sues were all settled when we had our meeting last week. I do not
understand why Senator McCarthy cannot have the opportunity to
present his statement and not be compelled to act as though he were
in some sort of a kangaroo court — '"Answer 'Yes' or 'No' " and that
sort of thing. It almost looks as though there was an attempt to
rattle him. , We ought to let him make his statement, and then, if he
has facts with him, we will investigate the facts. It seems to me just
as simple as that.
Senator Tydixgs. Gentlemen of the committee, so far as the Chair
is concerned about this, I think we ought to leave pretty well the man-
ner of presenting the evidence up to Senator McCarthy. Senator, at
any time that you feel you want to go into executive session with part
of this testimony, if you will indicate that I will call the committee
right here together and we will see what the situation is. If any mem-
ber of the committee at any time thinks that the matter that is being
made public should be heard iii executive session, he will indicate that
to me. We will go into a huddle and come out with a decision on that.
In the meantime, proceed.
Senator McCarthy. Let me make my position clear. I personally
do not favor presenting names, no matter how conclusive the evidence
is. The committee has called me this morning, and in order to intelli-
gibly present this information I must give the names. I think this
18 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
should be in executive session, I think it would be better. However,,
I am. here. The committee has voted to hold open sessions, so I
shall proceed.
Let us take the case of Dor
Senator Ttdings. I told you when I invited you to testify that you
could testify in any manner you saw fit. If it is your preference to
give these names in executive session we will be very glad to have your
wishes acceded to. If it is your desire to give them in open session,
that is your responsibility. Now, if you will indicate how you want
to proceed, the committee will take it under advisement and give you
an answer in 2 minutes.
Senator McCarthy. Let me say this first case has been handed to the
press already, I think we will have to proceed with this one in open
session. When we get to the next case, let us consider it.
Let us take the case of Dorothy Kenyon.
Senator Tydings. Is that one of the cases your brought up on the
Senate floor ?
Senator McCarthy. This is not.
Senator Tydings. I see. Go ahead.
Senator McCarthy. This lady, according to the latest issue of the
official registry of the United States Government, is on the Commis-
sion on the Status of Women, LTnited States Member on the Commis-
sions of the Economic and Social Council, United States Mission to
the United Nations, Department of State. Her salary is $12,000
per year.
And I now present to the chairman of the committee the documen-
tation of that ]);\rt of my testimony.
Senator Tydixgs. Will you hold that a minute until I find whether
it is listed here in the Eegister or not.
Senator McCarthy. This lady has been affiliated with at least 28
Communist-front organizations, all of which have been declared sub-
versive by an official Government agency. Nine of the 28 have been
cited as subversive by the Attorney General of the United States, and
I might say that her record of belonging to these subversive organi-
zations dates back 10 or 15 years. It is not something new.
On February 21, 1940, Miss Kenyon signed a protest under the
auspices of the Veterans of Abraham Lincoln Brigade condemning
the war hysteria "being whipped up by the Roosevelt administration."
Exhibit marked "1" I now hand the committee. This organization
has been cited as subversive by the congressional House Committee
on Un-American Activities, the California Un-American Activities
Committee, and the Attorney General of the United States.
Senator Tydings. Will you let us read that a minute. Is her name
marked ?
Senator McCarthy. I think you will find her name marked.
Senator Tydings. I have it. It isn't marked. We will mark it.
Let me read, Senator, for the record, the caption :
The following outstanrlins: Americans, writers, poets, playwrishts, educators,
judges, critics, and public officials signed the letter to President Roosevelt and
Attorney General Jackson protesting the attacks upon the Veterans of the Abra-
ham Lincoln Brigade and condemning the war hysteria now being whipped up
by tlie Roosevelt administration.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman, I might say that this is the only
photostat that I have, and I do not like to have it out of my possession.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 19
If the committee ^vants these documents, I wish they would arrange
with me to have them photostated so they may have a photostatic copy
of the document.
Senator Tvotngs. Senator McCarthy, we will have to file all of the
exhibits in the record that you <iive publicly, and I will instruct the
stenojirapher to o^uard these exhibits, and when the committee finishes
its deliberations to return them to you. Is that all riiiht ?
Senator jMcCakthy. May I ask one other thino;, Mr. Chairman.
This is my only copy. I wonder if the Chairman Avould not instruct
the clerk to have photostats made so that my file may be complete.
Senator McMahon. Could I ask a question on that ?
Senator Tydings. Yes.
Senator jNIcMahon. Senator, this is a clip from the Daily Worker,
February 21, 1940, and it is entitled "Signers of Protest."
Senator McCarthy. That's right.
Senator Mc^Maiion. Of course, the list is a very lengthy one. As to
some of the people on this list, I see one or two that I know casually
myself. The description of the petition that was signed is the Daily
Worker's description, and it does not appear to be a copy of the peti-
tion that these people signed. Is the Senator aware of that?
Senator McCarthy. I think the Senator has stated it correctly.
Senator McMahon. Yes.
Well, knowing the Daily Worker and its genius, from the copies that
I have seen, for misrepresentation, I am curious as to just wdiat the
petition said. You haven't got that with you, have you ?
Senator McCarthy. I am sure when the Senator sees the 28 docu-
ments he will no longer be skeptical.
Senator McIMahon. It is not a question of that. I am curious as to
what they did sign. It may be that in this instance the Daily Worker
is telling the truth as to what they signed, do you see ? But the Senator
has not got the actual petition that they signed ?
Senator INIcCarthy. That is correct. That is a copy of the petition
run in the Daily Worker as a paid ad, and advertised as having been
run by these people.
Senator Tydixgs. Does the Senator know where we could get the
original, so we could see wdiat the petition pur})orted to advocate?
Senator McCarthy. I think the committee must hire a competent
staff to run -anything down they care to run down.
Senator Tydings. I say, does the Senator have any idea of where we
might search for this particular item, so we can save time in finding it ?
Senator IMcCarthy. There are many places the Senator could
search. I do not know where he could find it.
Senator Tydixgs. The question that the Senator does not answer,
apparently, is that the Senator has no information. I am simply
trying to find out where we could get it in the quickest possible time.
Senator McCarthy. I do not have the original petition. I do not
know where it is.
Senator McMahon. I think, I\Ir. Chairman, that we should, as
quickly as possible, get this petition, for this reason, that there are
in this list about 100 names, and some of them bear good reputations.
Xow, to characterize them in a i-ecord of the Senale of the United
States just on the basis of a clip from the Daily Worker is something
that perhaps they are not entitled to either, so I do hope that we can
get -"-hat they reall}'^ signed.
20 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
Senator McCarthy. I hope I have made it clear that I also hope that
the committee proceeds to develo]) the situation.
Senator Tydings. Before the Senator proceeds, without any reflec-
tion on the press, newspaper accounts are not always the best evidence.
The petition itself, as the Senator, who has been an eminent judge,
would know, would be the best evidence, but we have a pretty wide
latitude in these committees and we can look that phase of the matter
over afterward.
Senator McCarthy. Thank you.
In signing this statement Miss Kenyon collaborated with such well-
known Communists as Paul Robeson, Bernard J. Stern, Albert Maltz,
Anna Louise Strong, William Gropper, Langston Hughes, and Harry
F. Ward.
Miss Kenyon is presently the sponsor of the National Council of
American Soviet Friendship. This organization has been declared
subversive by the House Un-American Activities Committee, the
California Un-American Activities Committee, and the Attorney
General.
Understand, when I say "presently," some of this information may
be 6 months old. It is the best information, and I have no informa-
tion that it has been withdrawn.
On November 16, 1948, Miss Kenyon as a member of the board
of sponsors of this officially declared subversive organization welcomed
the Red Dean of Canterbury, Hewlett Johnson, at a rally in Madison
Square Garden in the city of New York. Only a few days ago the
State Department refused to permit the Dean of Canterbury to enter
the United States because of his Communist record.
For the guidance of the connnittee I hand you herewith exhibit 2,
which fully documents Miss Kenyon's affiliation with the National
Council of American Soviet Friendship.
Senator McMahon. Senator, that National Council of American
Soviet Friendship had quite a vogue when we were cobelligerents
back during the war days. I may be in error, but I think that there
were a couple of Senators of the United States who are still members
of this body who were members of that organization at the time. Are
you aware of that ?
Senator McCarthy. The Senator is talking about war days. This
document is dated late 19-18, November 16, 19-18. And, Senator, I
may say this, that I have not declared these organizations subversive.
I tell you in each instance which official bodies have. In this case it
was declared subversive by the House Un-American Activities Com-
mittee, the California Un-American Activities Committee, and the
Attorney General.
I assume when they declared this organization subversive they did
it upon very excellent and competent proof, so when I refer to these
subversive organizations I am not saying that I myself have deter-
mined whether or not they are subversive.
Senator McMahon. I did not assert that you did. I just asked
you whether or not it is not a fact that a couple of the Senators had
been members of the National Council of American Soviet Friend-
ship. I would doubt, of course, that it was as late, though, as Novem-
ber 16, 1948, and you do point out that she was a member of the Board
on that date.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 21
Senator Tydings. Seniitor McCarthy, going back to the first exhibit
that you introduced, I see some names on here that 1 think it only
fair ouiilit to be associated with the evidence you have given. I see
such names as Ernest Hemingway, Dr. Harold Urey, the man who was
in the forefront of development of the atomic bomb for the United
States, and several others I recognize by reputation, some of them
holding ])ul)lic oflice. I believe here is one man, the Honorable Stanley
Isaacs; my recollection is that he holds an office in Xew York State
of some kind. So that there is rather a large mixture of names that
are pretty prominent.
Senator McCarthy. This is exhibit 2, Mr. Chairman. It is a letter
on the letterhead of the National Council of American-Soviet Friend-
ship, and has a list of the sponsors, Kenyon's name being one of the
list of sponsors. The letter reads as follows — or would the chairman
rather see it before I read it?
Senator Tydings. This is 2?
Senator McCarthy (reading) :
On Monday evening. December 18, the Very Reverend Hewlett Johnson, Dean
of Canterbury, and foremost leader in the democratic movement for world
peace, siieaks at IMadison Square Garden. This eminent churchman, who will
climax a month's tour of the United States with this rally, will present his
impressions of the American peace movement as it relates to the peace forces
of England and the continent. He will also report on his recent observations
of conditions in eastern Europe and his personal conversations with the leaders
of the new democracies.
We feel it is a rare privilege, indeed, for us to be able to present the dean in
the first significant rally to follow the elections. We know you will appreciate
the importance of forcefully demonstrating, particularly before the new congres-
sional .session, the people's will for peace through cooperation and friendship
with the Soviet I nion.
The Ambassador from the Soviet Union, His Excellency Mr. Alexander S.
Panyushkin. will address the meeting. The mreting will also feature Paul
Robeson, other well-known speakers, and a program of entertainment.
As you may recollect, thousands were turned away from the Garden on the
occasion of the dean's last visit here in 1945. Thus, to insure you proper ac-
commodations, we are enclosing an advance ticket order blank.
Senator Tydings. What was the date of that?
Senator McCarthy. Tliis is November l(i, 1948.
Won't you plan to attend this rally for peace and reserve seats for yourself
and your friends?
I point out that Miss Kenyon was not merely a member of this
organization Init one of the sponsors, and I hand the Chair the exhibit
labeled ^'2."
Senator Tydings. "Will you pause a moment there, Senator, until
we look at the document '^.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman, while the balance of the com-
mittee are looking at the docuunent, may I inquire as to how long
the committee intends to remain in session today ?
Senator Tydings. How long w^ould you like us to remain?
Senator McCarthy^. I frankly had hoped to develop three or four
cases. HoAvever, I do want to be on the floor today, and my thought is
that we should certainly develop more than we have now, but I would
not like to stay away more than an hour.
Senator Tydings. I have conferred with the members of the com-
mittee, and most of them seem to be of the opinion that we could con-
tinue for another half hour. Their engagements are such that at that
time thev won't be able to remain.
22 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
Senator Hickenlooper. I might suggest that Senator McCarthy
probably can get through with his presentation and the presentation
of his exhibits which he alleges support his position if we just let
him go.
Senator Tydings. Yes; but Senator, we want to get all the evidence
that is pertinent as we go along. We do not want to get it lopsided.
We want to make sure that everything is weighed properly and proper
connotations are put on it.
Senator McCarthy. May I ask the Chair, so I may make prepara-
tions, is it planned that we will have daily hearings?
Senator Tydings. We will meet tomorrow morning at 10 : 30, and
the only possible change I can see to that would be that the Senate
would agree to some unanimous-consent agreement during the day
to vote prior to 12 o'clock. We will certainly run from 10 : 30 to 12,
and maybe longer, if we ai-e not confronted with a vote in the Senate.
Tomorrow I hope you will have the answei-s to those two questions,
Senator McCarthy.
Senator McCarthy. I am sure the Chair will be satisfied with the
information lie gets.
Senator Green. With regard to this exhibit that has been put in
as evidence, I would like to draw attention to some of the names on
these sponsors of the National Council of American-Soviet Friend-
ship, Inc., which is considered such a Communist group. Here are the
Honorable Arthur Capper
Senator Tydings. Senator Capper?
Senator Green. Yes. The Honorable Claude Pepper; the Honor-
able Elbert D. Thomas ; the Honorable Joseph E. Davies, and a great
many other similar names.
Senator Hickenlooper. There are a great many others that the
Senator could read too, off that list.
Senator Green. If there are, I would like for you to read them.
Senator Hickenlooper. I do not want to take the time. That is an
exhibit the Senator has put in to substantiate the fact that the person
he alleges was a sponsor of an organization, and it seems to me we are
wasting time.
Senator Green. And the names on it are significant.
Senator Tydings. No exhibit can be given in part under any rules
of evidence that I have ever heard of, either before a Senate commit-
tee or anything else. You have to put it all in or keep it all out.
Senator Hickenlooper. That is what he has offered.
Senator Tydings. The Senator has read a letter and he has read
one name. I am going to take the liberty of reading all the names :
Louis Adamic, a candidate for the Senate in Illinois; George F.
Addes; Maxwell Anderson, playwright; John Taylor Arms; Max
Bedecht; Mrs. Alice S. Belester; Dr. Henry Lambert Bibby; Mrs.
Louis Bldch; Mrs. Anita Block; Simon Breines; Prof. E. W. Burgess;
Hon. Arthur Capper. Was he a United States Senator at the time this
was held? Charles Cha]^lin; Hon. John M. Coffee; Dr. Henry S.
Coffin ; Aaron Copland ; Norman Corwin ; Jo Davidson ; Hon. Joseph
E. Davies; Dr. Herbert John Davis; Hon. Hugh DeLacy, Member of
Congress; Dr. Stephen Duggan; Prof. Albert Einstein; Max Ep-
stein; Dr. Mildred Fairchild: Dr. Robert D. Feild; Lion Feucht-
wanger; the Reverend Joseph F. Fletcher; Homer Folks; Dr. W.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 23
Horsley Gantt : Dr. Caleb F. Gates, Jr.; Dean Christian Gauss; Ben
Gold; Dr. Mortimer Graves; Dr. Plarry Grundfest.
Also Dr. Alice Hamilton; Lillian Hellman; Mrs. Tliomas N.
Hepburn; Dr. Leslie Pinckney Hill; Prof. William Ernest Hocking;
Dr. Walter M. Horton; Langston Hughes; Dr. Walter Hullihen; Hon.
Stanley M. Isaacs; Dr. Millard H. Jencks; Prof. Howard INIumford
Jones; Helen Keller; Rockwell Kent; Dorothy Kenyon; Dr. Serge
Koussevitzky, leader of one of the great orchestras, I believe; Mrs.
Thomas W. Lamont; William W. Lancaster; Dr. Emil Lengyel;
John F. Lewis, Jr.; Prof. Robert S. Lynd; Clifford T. McAvoy;
Judge Lois JNIary McBride ; Maurice Maeterlinck ; Fritz Mahler ; Dr.
Thomas Mann ; Frank X. Martel ; Dr. Kirtley F. Mather ; Lewis Mer-
rill; Dr. George R. Minot; Mrs. Lucy Sprague Mitchell; Dr. Wesley
C. Mitchell; Charles Michael Mitzell; Pierre Monteux; Mme. Pierre
Monteux ; Bishop Arthur W. Moulton ; Hon. James E. Murray, United
States Senator; Dr. Philip G. Nash; Dr. Robert Hastings Nichols;
Eugene O'Neill ; Dr. ]\Iarion Edwards Park ; Dr. Frederick Douglas
Patterson ; Bishop Malcom E. Peabody ; Hon. Claude Pepper, United
States Senator ; Prof. Ralph Barton Perry ; Dr. E. C. Peters ; Dr. John
P. Peters ; Henry W. Pope ; ISIichael Quill : Carl Randau.
Also Anton Refregier; Elmer Rice; AVallingford Riegger; Paul
Robeson; Col. Raymond Robins; Earl Robinson; Reid Robinson;
Harold J. Rome; Joseph A. Rosen; Joseph A. Salerno; Miles M.
Sherover; Raymond P. Sloan; Dr. P. A. Sorokin; Maxwell S. Stew-
art; Leopold Stokowski, leader of an orchestra; Raymond Swing,
radio commentator; Genevieve Tabouis; Hon. Elbert D. Thomas;
R. J. Thomas: Dr. Max Thorek; S. A. Trone; Philip H. Van Gelder;
R. E. Van Horn; Professor George Vernadsky; Bishop W. J. Walls;
Dr. Harry F. Ward; Leroy Waterman: Max Weber; Dr. Henry N.
Wieman ;'Dr. C. C. Williams ; Hon. James H. Wolfe ; Dr. Max Yergan ;
Dean Mary Yost ; Dr. J. J. Zmrhal ; Leane Zugsmith.
I think that they all ought to be in there, so that we can judge from
the association the full purport of the letter and the inference.
Senator Lodge. Before you go on, Mr. Chairman, I want to say
once again that I am for having questions and I am for having the
statements with the proper connotations and proper evaluation, but
I think to interrupt the witness every single time and break up his
continuity and destroy the flow of his argument, the way we are doing,
is not the right procedure.
Senator Tydixgs. Just let me sav somethino- here in answer to that,
Senator Lodge. I have never in my life been connected with an}- sena-
torial, legal, or other inquiiy where an exhibit could be placed in evi-
dence and only parts of it read. It is not only fair, it is incumbent
upon this committee that the whole exhibit be placed before the press
of tlie country if this is an open hearing, and not just the parts of i*"
that may serve some ulterior motive.
Senator Lodge. Of course if we read the list on every single letter-
head of ever}' single thing that is put in here, we will be here until
Christmas. I am not objecting to putting in the complete documents
in the record; of course I am not objecting to that. I am objecting to
this constant interruption of the witness so that he never gets a fair
shake, that's all.
68970 — 50 — pt. 1 3
24 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY mVE'STIGATION
Senator Green. Mr. Chairman, it seems to me it is the only proper
thing for us to do to interrupt. Here the witness has introduced a
document, and he ended up his introduction by introducing the docu-
ment as evidence of the Communist affiliations of Miss Kenyon. He
ends up by saying, "other well-known Communists sponsoring the
event were Howard Fast, Saul Mills, Ella Winter, John Howard Law-
son, and Langston Hughes," and I wanted to ask the Senator from
Massachusetts whether he thinks it is fair to pick out those names and
omit the other names that were read.
Senator Lodge. I think the time to do that is after Senator Mc-
Carthy has made his statement. Then we can each one go at him.
That is the way it has been done here ever since I have been here. I
think the immemorial practice is to let the witness make a statement
and then the chairman asks the senior man to ask questions, and then
the senior man on the other side, and then he finally comes down to
the low man on the totem pole and everybody has his chance to ask
questions. That is the way it has always been done. For some reason
that has not been made clear to me, whether it is to rattle or whether
it is to confuse or something, I do not knoAV, we have an entirely dif-
ferent procedure today.
Senator Green. What the witness is attempting to do is to give the
impression of a certain instrament — I do not mean to say it is inten-
tional, but the result of the names that he has selected gi^es a very
false impression of the instrument.
Senator Lodge. And the Senator from Khocle Island is perfectly
capable of clearing that point up. He is a very eloquent man. He
is not a Philadelphia lawyer, he is a Providence lawyer, and when
his time comes to question he can clear all those points up, and that
is the orderly way to do it from the standpoint of the committee, from
the stand])oint of the presentation in the press, and from the stand-
point of fairness to the witness.
Senator Tydings. Senator Lodge, if I may say this, if this were a
hearing in executive session, that would be one thing, but these charges
are going out all over the country in the press and they ought to go
out with all of the evidence available, and not just selected parts of it.
If it does not go out in that status before the people of the country,
then the people cannot draw the full conclusion that the evidence
presented warrants, and I think it has to go that way or it should
not go at all, if we are going to have open hearings.
Senator Green. We are not attem]:)ting to introduce other evidence
to contradict tlie witness or to supplement it. All we want is the full
statement, and not extracts.
Senator Lodge. All the evidence is not available. I quite agree with
the chairman and with Senator Green that it would be most unfortu-
nate if reputations of innocent persons were in any way besmirched,
but we cannot in any possible way clear up the wrong that has been
done on the spur of the moment. The time to do that is after the Sena-
tor has made his charges. Then we investigate the charges. That
is the Avay to proceed.
Senator Green. Mr. Chairman, as was brouoht out in the intro-
ductory discussion of this matter, this is a public meeting and charges
go out and are spread all over the country in the news]iapers, and if
at the time a mistaken summary of a document is given, the correct
summary won't catch up with it at all. The matter will be ancient
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 25
history and newspapers won't print it. The eloquent Senator from
Massachusetts knows as a newspaperman that that is tlic fact, so it is
important to have tliat false impression removed at the time the list
of these people is given out to the press.
Senator Lodge. I also know that there are none of us here in this
connnittee who have the information at hand to correct any misstate-
ments that the Avitness may make.
Senator Gijeen. The witness has given it to us to be given to the
public.
Senator Tydtngs. Now that the Chair is overruled, all documents
that are submitted will be read in full hereafter so that the people
of the country may get all the evidence at the time.
Senator Lodge. That is perfectly all right with me. I have no
objection to the documents that the witness puts in being read in full.
What I object to is this constant interruption and hacking away at
him all the time so he does not get a chance to make his argument.
Senator Hickenlooper. Just to clear up a statement of the chair-
man, the Senator from Wisconsin just submitted the Official Register
of the United States, 1949, containing on page 490 the name of Doro-
thy Kenyon, Commission on the Status of Women, New York; sal-
ary and compensation, $12,000 a year. Does the chairman intend to
read the entire Official Register of the United States every time the
Senator from Wisconsin wants to produce a name or something to
prove a specific point?
Senator Tydixgs. I will read into the record the names of all the
people on this Commission. I do not see any need to go and put all
the consuls from Shanghai to Singapore on the one hand, and Ice-
land to some other place, in the record.
Senator Hickexlooper. But, Mr. Chairman, the witness only intro-
duced that to indicate a position of employment of a particular in-
dividual.
Senator Tydixgs. That's right.
Senator Hickenlooper. The other names are not involved one way
or another, other than the allegation that she was employed by the
State Department.
Senator Tydixgs. And there is no allegation here that this is a
Communist-front organization, but there was an allegation in the
other case that that was a Communist-front organization, and there-
fore we ought to see who is in it, which is an entirely different matter.
Senator Hickexlooper. I just want to know whether the chairman
is going to read the entire Register.
Senator Tydix'GS. I would also draw the observation that the gen-
tlemen on the right of me are now consuming more time than are the
gentlemen on the left.
Senator Lodge. I deny that. I would like to have my comments
drawn up against those of the chairman, and we will find out.
Senator Tydix-^os. You should not complain and then adopt the
ver}^ thing j'ou are complaining about.
Senator Lodge. I am not doing that. No, I am not doing that.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman, I think as I give the documents
showing the Communist-front organizations that this individual has
belonged to. you will find in almost rather a sizable number the names
of some fine individuals, I think that it is possible that you yourself
may be duped into joining, or having your name used on some Com-
26 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
munist-front organization. The reason I submit the vast number
is that it is impossible for any normal individual, of normal intel-
ligence, to be so deceived that they can act as sponsors for 28 different
Communist-front organizations, I might say that I personally would
not be caught dead belonging to any one of the 28.
Senator Tydings. That is opinion, Senator. We would like to have
the evidence and the facts, and we can judge more from them than
we can from opinions. We will have to form the opinions.
Senator Lodge. Surely the Senator can express opinions.
Senator Tydings. If we are going to condemn people on opinion
evidence, there won't be many people left in the end.
Senator Lodge. If we are going to prevent the Senator from ex-
pressing opinions, the character of this whole body is going to change.
Senator McCarthy. I thank the Senator.
I might say that one of the grounds for dismissal of an employee
who has top-secret clearance is his associations. As the Senator knows,
if he is a banker and he is looking for a cashier and he finds that Mr.
Smith chums with safecrackers, bookies, gamblers, cheats, and rogues,
he won't hire Mr. Smith as a cashier, and that is the theory that I as-
sume our State Department goes upon. If they find these individuals
with unusual connections, a long trend, they can assume that they are
unsafe risks. The Secretary has so stated, I believe.
In sponsoring the Red Dean of Canterbury's appearance in the
United States a j^ear and a half ago Miss Kenyon collaborated with
such pro-Communists as Ben Gold, the avowed Conamunist leader of
the Fur Workers Union, and Paul Robeson.
Here we have the singular situation of the Department of State
refusing to admit one of the world's most prominent radical Com-
munist churchmen and on the other hand one of the Department's
prominent officials welcoming and sponsoring him to this country.
It would seem, Mr. Chairman, as though perhaps the State Depart-
ment's left hand does not know what the other hand is doing ; or per-
haps put it the other way around. The right hand does not know
what the left hand is doing.
I should now like to hand the committee exhibit 3. This is a cordial
invitation to attend a dinner and presentation of the first annual award
of the American Russian Institute to President Franklin Roosevelt for
"Furthering American-Soviet Relations."
The event occurred on May 7, 1946, at 6 : 30 o'clock in the evening
in the grand ball room of the Pennsylvania Hotel in New York City.
The dinner cost $7.50 a plate.
The American Russian Institute has been cited as subversive by the
House Un-American Activities Committee, California Un-American
Activities Committee, and the Attorney General.
Senator McMahon. On what date. Senator?
Senator McCarthy. What date were they cited ?
Senator McMahon. Yes.
Senator McCarthy. I do not haA^e the dates of the citation. I think
the Senator will recall as well as I do the date the Attorney General
put out his list.
Senator Tydings. Was this before or after the Attorney General
put out his list?
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 27
Senator IMclMAirox. That is quite material. You see Senator Lodge,
this is a perfect illustration of the value of a question at the proper
time to clear up a statement of fact. Here is a dinner which is held
under date of May 7, 1946. in New York City. The Senator proceeds
to say that the organization that sponsored it was cited as subversive
by the House Un-American Activities Committee, the California Un-
American Activities Committee, and the Attorney General. Now, it
is quite conceivable that a jierson would have been a sponsor on May
7, 194G, and have refused to have been a sponsor a year or a year and
a half later, after the American Russian Institute had been denom-
inated as being subversive. There is a perfect illustration of the value
of questioning any Avitness, whether he be a Senator or anybody else,
in order to ti-y to convey what the truth of the matter is.
I think it is regrettable, Senator, that you have not that information
with you at the present time. I shall secure it and jnit it in the record.
Senator Ttuings. I am sure the Senator from Wisconsin sees the
wisdom of what the Senator from Connecticut has so pertinently
brought out — the great difference that there might be in a case like
this, of an innocent person joining what he thought was a worth-while
organization or movement or occasion or ceremony on the one hand,
thinking there was nothing subversive about it, and who learns later
that it is denominated as a subversive organization.
Now, certainly, don't we owe it to these people whose names we are
throwing about the country, on the radio and in the press and in
magazines and in the newspapers, to at least give them, those who have
acted in good faith and with purely patriotic motives, the right to have
the testimony surrounded by facts before it is given, so that we do not
do infinite harm to people mIio, I am sure the Senator himself in some
cases would say, are not Communists ?
Senator Lodge. Before the witness answer that, my able friend from
Connecticut addressed me. I do not agree with him at all that this
is an example of why it is a good thing to interrupt the witness. It
is perfectly possible to make a note of the fact that he did not mention
the date and later on bring it out. In fact, I think that is a more
effective way to do it. These questions of dates, I noted that myself
and I made a note of it to ask the Senator from Wisconsin later, when
my turn came to ask questions.
All I want to do is not to break the continuity of the argmnent. Then
let him make the argument, and those who want to try to tear the
argmnent down will have a chance to do it.
Senator Tydixgs. Let me say I thought I was speaking for every
member of the committee wdien I said that I hoped we could conduct
this investigation so that it would not be labeled either a witch hunt
or a whitewash. In order to do that, if we are going to live up to that
formula, it seems to me, if we allow a lot of statements to go in the
record that are subject to instantaneous false impressions and con-
clusions, that we may not have intended to conduct a witch hunt but
we are getting pretty close over on the other barrier.
I have no desire to shut off anj^ testimony that the Senator from
Wisconsin has, but I would caution him that when he makes a state-
ment he ought to be able to supply the dates so that false impressions
and false conclusions cannot be drawn from his testimony, which,
even though we corrected it later, might not reach the press and the
28 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY mVEiSTIGATION
radio, and I simply say that tliat is just justice, nothing more than
simple justice.
Senator Hickenlooper. Mr. Chairman, I can say right now that the
proceedings as far as they have gone this morning, if the proceedings
as patterned this morning are to continue throughout this investiga-
tion, it is heading for a label of some kind, and I may have to name it.
Senator Tydings. I agree with you thoroughly, and I could name
it too.
Senator McCarthy. The Chair just stated that he thought these
names should not be all bandied about the country. I have pointed
out to the Chair, and I believe this was pointed out by the Attorney
General, that in almost any one of these organizaitons labeled sub-
versive you will find from time to time competent people's names listed.
You will not lind one individual belonging to 25 or 30.
Senator Tydings. That is drawing a conclusion, Senator.
Senator McCarthy. When the Senator says we shall not put all
these names out to the country, it is the Senator who is reading them.
I am merely reading the name of this individual who belongs to 28
organizations that have been listed as subversive by the Attorney Gen-
eral, by the House committee, and other official bodies. Let us make it
clear that you are referring to all of these names going out. I am
not putting those names out ; that is the chairman.
Along with the lady sponsoring this dinner appeared Lee Pressman,
who has been named as a member of the Communist underground cell
in the Government by Whitaker Chambers. Other well-known Com-
munists sponsoring the event were Howard Fast, Saul Mills, Ella
Winter, John Howard Lawson, and Langston Hughes.
Senator Green. There, I think that is a selected list that you have
made up, is it not ?
Senator McCarthy. The present executive director of this subver-
sive organization is Henry H. Collins, late of the State Department,
who has been named by Whitaker Chambers as a member of the Com-
munist spy ring operating in the Federal Government.
Senator Hickenlooper. Didn't you skijD a paragraph ?
Senator McCarthy. No.
Senator Hickenlooper. I have another paragraph, following the
list of names the Senator read in. I don't know whether the Senator
intended to leave the paragraph out or not, or whether I have an
accurate copy.
Senator McCarthy. I beg your pardon. The Senator from Khode
Island interrupted, and I lost my place.
Other well-known Communists sponsoring the event were Howard
Fast, Saul Mills, Ella Winter, John Howard Lawson, and Langston
Hughes.
Although I shall discuss the unusual affinity of Mr. Phillip C.
Jessup, of the State Department, for Communist causes later in this
inquiry, I think it pertinent to note that this gentleman now formulat-
ing top-flight policy in the Far East affecting half the civilized world
was also a sponsor of the American Russian Listitute.
The present executive director of this subversive organization is
Henry H. Collins, late of the State Department, who has been named
by Whitaker Chambers as a member of the Communist spy ring oper-
ating in the Federal Government. It was in the home of Mr. Collins,
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 29
accoixling to Chambers, that some of the niicrofihns of secret State
Department documents were made. Collins was also one of those
who refused to testify before the House Un-American Activities Com-
mittee as to whether or not he was a Communist Party member.
The Conference on Pan American Democracy has been declared to
be a subversive Communist organization by the Attorney General of
the United States, the House Un-American Activities Committee, and
the California Un-American Activities Committee.
Senator Tydings. Senator McCarthy, would you put in the dates
tliere, if you have them?
Senator McCarthy. I think much of the material the Chair wants
will have to be developed by the committee. I just cannot afford to
hire the investigators to present a court case to the committee.
Senator Tydixgs. I thought you might have it and it would save
us work ; that is all.
Senator McCarthy. I would rather the committee saved me some
work.
Senator Tydixgs. You are making charges
Senator McCarthy. I am not making charges. I am giving the
committee information of individuals who appear to all tlie rules of
common sense as being very bad security risks. I am giving the
committee information which I think they are bound to follow under
the Senate mandate.
Senator Tydings. Let me follow you there.
Senator McCarthy. Let me finish, Mr. Chairman. Let's have an
agreement. When you ask a question, let me finish my answer, will
you?
The Senate unanimously gave this committee a mandate. I think
that mandate is to develop any information which on its face makes
it appear tliat the individual concerned is a bad security risk. And
I frankly do not — let's make this clear — have the staff to take each
of the cases and develop it to the point of making a court case. You
understand that.
Senator Tydings. You have left the committee in a rather embar-
rassing position, because the resolution which brings us here and
which brings you here reads as follows :
In the conduct of this study and investigation, the committee is directed to
procure by subpena and examine the complete loyalty and employment files and
records of all Government employees in the Department of State and other such
agencies against whom charges have been heard.
Without somebody makes a charge, or you call it a charge, what
do we do then ? How do we get the records ? We are only author-
ized to get them, by the Senate language, if you or somebody makes a
charge. You say you are not making any charge. We are in a pretty
small position to issue a subpena.
Senator McCarthy. Senator, let me say this. If there is any-
thing you want me to do to make it possible for you to get those sub-
penas, I will do it. I am not in a position to file any formal charges.
What you mean by a charge I do not know. If you want me to
charge that from the evidence it appears that this woman is an ex-
tremely bad security risk, that she should not be in the State Depart-
ment 1 hour, I will be glad to say that. If you tell me what you
mean by a charge, what 3'ou want me to do so that you will under this
30 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
mandate be entitled to say to the President, "We want those files, all of
them," yon may be snre I will do that.
Senator Tydings. Senator, let me say to yon that I think all that
you have said up to now are charges, and you have given information
that you have to support those charges as you see it. I would call
them charges. Certainly we are not going to have an investigation
without some charges being made, and the Senate itself put the lan-
guage in. Fortunately I was not there the night the resolution was
adopted. I only inherited it, and I have read it over six or eight
times. I think that we are perfectly at liberty to get these files by
any proper method that we can devise, because of what you are testi-
fying. But I would label them charges, because I am sure you are
charging these people with being either Communists or allied with
Communists. You called it a Communist spy ring in the State De-
pai'tment, and I think all those things are charges, and I think it is
our duty to investigate it. I think they are charges.
Senator Hickenlooper. Mr. Chairman, I take it the witness is actu-
ally charging that the people to whom he refers in these outlines of
information are bad security risks. I take it the Senator is making
that charge.
Senator McCarthy. I am convinced of that. I think any normal
man would be convinced of that. If I must do something in addition
to that to make it possible for you to get the files, you can be sure
I will do it.
Senator Ttdings. I will consider that what you said are charges.
Senator McCarthy. I will say before handing you this next doci^-
ment that it is difficult for me to understand the apparent perplexity
of my Democratic colleagues on the committee with reference to the
names that appear on these documents. I know the Senators are all
aware of the fact that if the Communists did not enlist well-meaning
and prominent persons in every phase of American life it would not
be a front organization. Wlien the FBI turned over the results of its
probe of these front organizations to the Attorney General, it was well
known that the names of prominent and reputable citizens were inter-
mingled with the Communists and pro-Communists. Despite this
knowledge he proceeded to declare without equivocation these organi-
zations that I have specified as Communist front and as subversive
and therefore dangerous to our national security ; and I might say that
the significance of these documents, Mr. Chairman, is not that this
woman belongs to one organization that the Attorney General has said
is subversive, but her long chain of activity starting from, I believe the
first document is 1935, right up to date.
Senator Tydings. To reassure you, I do not know of anything you
have said so far that we should not investigate.
Senator McCarthy. Thank you.
Senator McMahon. I gather, then, from what you have just said,
that just because a person's name is on the list of sponsors of an organi-
zation which has been declared as — what is the language, "subversive"?
Senator McCarthy. The Attorney General declares them subver-
sive. Different committees have given them a different label.
Senator McMahon. That that per se does not make a citizen suspect.
Senator McCarthy. No. I think this, though, Senator. If you
find someone in the State Department who is a member of a Commu-
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 31
nist front oroanizatioii, then you should check the amount of activity
he has had in that organization, his association with people who are
known Communists. No, definitely not. There are some fine people
who have been tricked into having their names placed on these. For
example, I would not be surprised, Senator, if some of the members
sitting at the table, who are certainly all loyal Americans, might have
at some time or another received a letter from an organization, "Will
you sponsor a dinner we are throwing for So-and-so?", and you might
write back and say "All right."
I do think, however, wdien you get to people who are on loyalty
boards, who are getting top secret clearance^ then if you find they even
belong to one Communist front organization we should go further.
I think when you find that you have a long chain such as we have here,
of 28, you haA'e an extremely bad situation.
Senator McMaiion. The point you are making is that it is cumula-
tive. One case might well be just casual and accidental, but your
opinion is that it is cumulative, and if there are — how many has she
been a member of ?
Senator McCarthy. Twenty-eight I have now. Most likely that is
not the entire list.
Senator ]\IcMaiiox. That is a great number and it is something to be
looked into, and it would be very helpful, Senator, and of course I
understand that you say you can't do it, but it would be very helpful
to me in evaluating it to find how many she joined after the Attorney
General went into them, and how many before.
This is said with no reference to this Kenyon woman, whom I never
heard of before in my life, but there are some naive people in the
country, too, that will join any old thing that comes along.
Senator McCarthy. Someone so naive is a bad security risk, so
naive that they would sponsor 28.
Senator McMahox. I am not arguing that. I am just pointing
out that it would be interesting to find out the dates this woman
joined the organizations and when they were declared subversive.
Senator McCarthy. That is one of the reasons I hope very quickly
the committee hires a staff so that these matters can be checked into.
I give the committee exhibit 4, a letterhead of this organization
dated November 16, 1938, going back 12 years. The members will
note that over 11 years ago Dorothy Kenyon was a sponsor of this
organization which held a conference in Washington on December 10
of the same year.
Her Communist associates in this enterprise included Langston
Hughes, Rockwell Kent, Lewis Merrill, Mervyn Rathborne, and Dirk
J. Struick.
Senator Tydixgs. Put in all the names, Mr. Recorder, in addition to
those the Senator has named.
(Note. — Other names on the letterhead marked exhibit 4 are as
follows:)
Prof. Donald ^IcConnell Algernon Black
Dr. David Efron Bruce Bliven
Louis Adamic Dr. Franz Boas
Dr. Wallace W. Atwood Heywood Broun
Eleanor Copenhaver Anderson Erskine Caldwell
Prof. Hugo Fernandez Artucio Charlotte Carr
Eunice Fuller Barhard Bennett A. Cerf
Alfred M. Bingham Evans A. Clark
32
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
Max Lerner
Marine Lopes
Jeau Lyons
George Marshall
Lewis Merrill
Dr. Clyde R. Miller
Prof. Gardner Murphy
William Pickens
A. Phillip Randolph
David Saposs
Prof. Margaret Schlauch
Adelaide Schulkind
Guy Emery Shipler
James T. Shotwell
Upton Sinclair
George Soule
Isobel Walker Soule
Maxwell Stewart
Isidore F. Stone
William Wachs
Prof. Goodwin Watson
Roy Wilkins
Dr. Max Winkler
Dr. Stephen S. Wise
Max Yergan
Gifford A. Cochran
Dr. Gilberto Concepcion De Gracia
Prof. George Counts
Malcolm Cowley
Prof. Horace Davis
Prof. Jerome Davis
R. E. Diffendorfer
Bail<?y W. Diffie
Dr. William K. Dodo
Prof. Paul H. Douglas
Dr. Henry Grattan Doyle
John L. Elliott
Prof. Henry Pratt Fairchild
Prof. Irving Fisher
Prof. Eugene Forsey
Margaret Forsythe
Frances R. Grant
Alberto Grieve
Sidney Hillman
Prof. Arthur H. Holcombe
John Haynes Holmes
Quincy Howe
Rev. William Lloyd Imes
Stanley M. Isaacs
Gardner Jackson
Prof. Chester L. Jones
Senator McCarthy. The Senator will note this, that yon have the
names of the same men who have been pnblicly labeled as Communists
on practically each one of these Communist-front organizations as a
sponsor or one of the top officers. You will note also that the re-
spectable names that you will find on one or two of these do not perme-
ate the whole file.
Senator Tydings. Go ahead, Senator. Conclude that page, and
then we will try to quit ; before you get to the next exhibit.
Senator McCarthy. It might be of interest to the committee to
knoAv that Mervyn Rathborne, a consponsor with Miss Kenyon, has
just testified for the Government at the trial of Harry Bridges, stating
under oath that he was a member of the Communist Party at the
time of this conference and that he was frequently a visitor at the
White Plouse.
I think it is important that the committee know that the Communist
activities of Miss Kenyon are not only deep-rooted but extend back
through the years. Her sponsorship of the doctrines and philosophy
of this ruthless and Godless organization is not new.
It is inconceival^le that this woman could collaborate with a score
of organizations dedicated to the overthrow of our form of govern-
ment by force and violence, participate in their activities, lend her
name- to their nefarious purposes and be ignorant of the whole sordid
and un-American aspect of their work.
Senator Tydings. That finishes exhibit 4. The committee will
stand in recess until 10 : 30 tomorrow morning, in this place.
Senator McCarthy. May I ask the Chair before you adjourn how
long you p]i\n on proceeding tomorrow ?
Senator Tydings. I would imagine Ave would go for probably an
hour and a half for certain, and maybe 2 hours.
Senator McCarthy. In other words, to 12 : 30 or 1 o'clock.
(Whereupon, at 12:40 p. m., the hearing was adjourned, to re-
convene at 10 : 30 a. m. of the following day, Thursday, March 9,
1960.)
STATE DEPAETMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY
INVESTIGATION
THURSDAY, MARCH 9, 1950
United States Senate,
Committee on Foreign Relations,
Subcommittee Appointed Under Senate Resolution 231,
Washington^ I). C.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 :30 a. m. in room 318
Senate Office Building, Senator Millard E. Tydings, chairman of the
subcommittee, presiding.
Present : Senators Tydings (chairman of the subcommittee) , Green,
McMahon, Hickenlooper.
Also present : Senators Connally (chairman of the full committee) ,
McCarthy, Lucas, and Knowland.
TESTIMONY OF HON. JOSEPH K. McCARTHY, UNITED STATES
SENATOR PROM WISCONSIN— Resumed
Senator Tydings. Senator, at the opening of yesterday's hearing I
asked you, or sometime during the hearing I asked you, if you could
be in position this morning to give us the name of the individual that
caused so much controversy yesterday. Would you care to respond to
that request now ?
Senator McCarthy. I am very happy to do so, ]Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, I understand you would like me to answer the fol-
lowing questions in case No. 14. We are referring yesterday to case
No. 57. I learned afterward you meant case No. 14,
Senator Tydings. I said No. 14, but I did not know what connota-
tion you had.
Senator .McCarthy. Question No. 1: "Will you give the name of
this individual ?" The answer is yes. I now hand you that name, with
a copy for each of the individuals on the committee.
Senator Tydings. Just a moment. Senator.
Senator McCarthy. Let me finish the statement : Can I give you the
name of the State Department official mentioned in the secret files in
that case, and am I making any charge against that official ?
The answer is no.
Senator Hickenlooper. Would you repeat what you said. Senator?
I was busy looking here and did not hear what you said. You handed
in the name of the individual.
Senator McCarthy. Let me read you both of them. I understand
the chairman wants me to answer two questions this morning. No. 1 :
"Will you give the name of the individual in case No. 14 ?*' The answer
to that is yes, and I have now handed him the name, with a copy for
each member of the committee.
33
34 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INrVESTIGATION
No. 2, can I give him the name of the State Department official men-
tioned in the secret files in that case, and am I making any charge
against that official? The answer is no. The committee can make
snch charge against this or any other individual in this case or any
other case as it sees fit. That is the task delegated to the committee by
the Senate. Only those whom I name am I charging as bad security
risks. However, the committee undoubtedly will find many whom it
desires to charge in like manner.
If the chairman, now that he has the name of case No. 14, desires
the name of the particular State Department official whom he referred
to yesterday, I can tell him how to obtain it in a very simple and easy
manner. That is by subpenaing the files. However, to get the com-
plete story in this case, it undoubtedly will be necessary to get not
merely the State Department's — and this is important, Mr. Chair-
man — loose-leaf loyalty and personnel files, the two files of the State
Department, but also the files of the Civil Service Commission and the
FBI.
If tlie chairman considers this morals case more important than the
other cases, I have no objection whatsoever to recessing the hearings
until the committee obtains the files.
Senator Ttdings. Senator, might I ask you whether the name of this
individual is in your files?
Senator McCarthy. No.
Senator Tydings. It is not?
Senator McCarthy. No.
Senator Tydings. It is not in the file in case No. 14?
Senator McCarthy. I have given the chairman all of the informa-
tion in case No. 14 on the Senate floor. There are a great number of
names in the secret files, in the FBI files, and the Civil Service Com-
mission files. He wdll find those names by, as I say, subpenaing and
getting the files.
Senator Tydings. Wlien you testified in this case — and I just want
to clear it up — you said :
In this case —
that is case No. 14 —
a CSA report of September 2, 1947, is replete with information concerning the
attempt of a high State Department official —
and so forth.
Now I assume that the information which is so replete did not con-
tain the name of this high State Department official.
Senator McCarthy. I am sure the chairman will find all the names
he is interested in in that file. I tell the chairman those are the secret
files to which I have not access. I have the information. I am sure
the chairman will find that every word, every single word, that I have
stated on the Senate floor in 'regard to this case is true. If the
chairman wants the name, he can get the name. I can't. I do not
have subpena powers. If the chairman is interested in this case, he can
now test the authority of the committee and, as I say, if the chairman
thinks this particular morals case — this is principally a morals case,
understand — is of sufficient import, I have no objection whatever to
recessing — not that my objection would be controlling, understand —
letting the chairman subpena the files ; and, if upon examination of
those files he finds that he wants to investigate some individual other
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 35
than those I have named, obviously that is completely up to the chair-
man.
Senator Tydings. I would like to say, Senator McCarthy, we will in
due time, I am sure, attempt, and I believe obtain, access to all these
files. A-NHiat I was trying to ascertain this morning was whether or not
your photostatic copies, whicli you said you had, of a great many of
these cases — I assumed all of them — had the name of this person in
j'our own files, and I understand that you say it is not there.
Senator McCarthy. I do not have the name of the individual. Un-
doubtedly his name will show up from time to time in my files, but I as
of now cannot identify the individual to whom you refer. But there is
nothing mysterious aljout any of these names, Mr. Chairman. If the
Chair is so anxious to get that name, he can recess this very minute and
go over and say to the Secretary of State, "Let me see the file in case
No. 14. I want tlie names." Then, if the Secretary of State says you
cannot see them, that that is a secret from you, the Chair has the power
to subpena. Mr. Chairman, don't expect me to give you all the minute
details of these files.
Senator Greex. Apparently Senator Tydings has not made clear the
point. It isn't that we want to know the names, but we wanted to know
whether you knew the names.
Senator McCarthy. I have told you that I cannot give you the
name. I do not know it at this time. I can try and get it for you.
Senator Hickenlooper. I may say that the point certainly has not
been made clear to me as yet. 1 don't know what the purpose of this
persistent inquiry on a matter which this committee can readily find
out if we just subpena the files and get hold of the information is.
I think the Senator has made clear that he does not have all the minute
details, and I take it that it is a part of the duty of this committee to
get hold of those files and to get hold of the intimate and detailed
information. So, I agree with the Senator from Ehode Island that
the point probably hasn't been made clear.
Senator McCarthy. I might say I have a very strong suspicion as
to the name of the individual. I will not give the Chair any suspicions.
1 understand that certain other — in fact, one of the members of one
of the investigating committees called me and told me he thought
lie knew the name of the individual. He might be able to help you.
I can give you that. But it is much simpler to get the name definitely
and certainly by calling and getting the FBI file in this case.
Senator Tydings. Thank you. Senator. We will endeavor to get
the names of all people who are involved in this case from all of the
files that are pertinent to this case. But I don't want to pursue the
matter unduly. I simply wanted to ascertain whether or not the
name of this man was in file 14 of your own records, and I under-
stand from your statement that the answer is "No."
Am I correct or wrong ?
Senator McCarthy. The name of the individual is not in my file
No. 14, period ; at least, not that I know of. When you ask do I know
his name, I have a strong suspicion as to what his name is, but the
Chair can find out definitely.
I am very curious, incidentallv-
5, im^n^ciiLtiii V f
Senator Tydings. I want to get on with the testimony, but I would
like to tell you that the reason I have asked you this question again
36 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
was this : You say, "In this case a CSA report of September 2, 1947,
is replete — is replete — with information covering the attempt of a
high State Department official to induce several individuals who had
signed affidavits reflecting adversely upon the employees to repudiate
their affidavits," and it occurred to me that if you could make that
statement, obviously, the name of the individual would be in your hies,
and I thought we could get it very quickly that way and act on it
very quickly in accordance therewith.
But now that you have testified that the name of this individvial
is not in case 14, although you say it is replete with information, there
is nothing else for us to do but look elsewhere for the name, as you
obviously do not have it.
Senator Green. Mr. Chairman, I do not think that necessarily
follows. The witness has several times limited his reply to saying,
when asked about the source of his statement that you have read,
that he did not have the name in file 14. I would like to ask hmi
whether he has it in any other files.
Senator McCarthy. Let me put it this way, so there is no doubt in
jour mind : I think I know the name of the individual. I have
naturally written that name down. It is in my files. I have seen no
original, no document, upon which I can definitely state the name is
John Jones or Pete Smith. That is available to you, gentlemen. I
do have papers, any number of them. I have information from indi-
viduals indicating various names. I do not have any documentary
proof of that, and I am sticking to that. Do you understand me now,
Senator ?
I have a very strong suspicion. I think I know the name, but it is.
too easy for you gentlemen to find it out for me to start giviiig my'
suspicions, to give you hearsay of what John Jones or Pete Sinith
has told me. When I say I do not have the name, I have seen no
original document stating what his name was. I have not seen the
original file giving his name. I have not seen a photostatic copy
of that file giving his name.
You, gentlemen, apparently know his name also. I think I know
the name. If you Icnow the name, which I assume you do, you can
j^roceed to make any charge you care to against this individual.
The Senator has referred to this as a "mystery" case. I don't think
there is anything mj^sterious about the case to the Senator. I am
slightly mystified as to the importance of this particular individual.
I think that case is important, you understand, or I Avould never have
mentioned it on the Senate floor. I think it is important. But let
me repeat that, while I feel I am reasonably certain I know his name,
I think the Senator who is now addressing me knows it just as well
as and better than I do.
I have no documentary proof, no original file, upon which I can
say definitely "The name is John Jones" or "Pete Smith." I have
given you the name of the individual in case No. 14. In his file you
will find documented everything which I said on the Senate floor,
everything I have said about this man, and I intend to stick to facts
that are completely documented. I hope that is clear. Senator.
Senator Green. I don't think your answer is responsive to my ques-
tion. You mistake the purpose of it. The purpose is not to find
the name of the individual ; it is to find out how accurate the founda-
tion is for your charges.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 37
Senator McCarthy. That .you can find out by obtaining the files.
Senator Tydings. Let the Senator finish his question.
Senator Greex. The question is not of the fact, but whether your
charges are based on facts. This is an illustration that I would like
to follow up.
I do not yet understand from your answer whether or not this
charoe, where you say the files are replete with references to this
individual and yet you cannot say whether you have his name or not.
And I want to know AA'hether there is, not in file 14 alone but in any
otlier file on which your charges are based, the name of this individual.
Senator jNIcCakthy. Senator, if you want to know whether or not
my charges are true or false, the best way in the world to find out is
to get the file. I have told you what is in the files. That file can be
subpenaed by you. You understand that, Senator. And that is the
best way in the world that you can determine whether every word I
have spoken here is true or false. We have given you the subpena
power. The entire Senate said to this committee, "We want this
committee to go into those files and find out whether or not what
McCarthy said is true," and the easiest way to do that is to get those
files. If I am saying a single word that is not true, I know that many
in the administration will enjoy proving it. The best way they can
prove it is to bring down all those files.
Now let me make this clear : I and the public will not be satisfied
with a loose-leaf State Department file in which you can shove in and
take out material. Unless you get all the files, so you are sure you
have them, and I will tell you how to do that without any difficulty,
when you do that, then you will find that every word, every word, that
I have given you as to what those files contain is, so far as I know,
absolutely true.
Now, the simplest and easiest way to find that out is to get those
files.
Senator Green. As I have stated to you several times, the object
of this question is not to find out whether it is true or false; it is to
find out how far 3'ou relied on facts in your possession for making
the charges.
You have said that your files are replete with references on which
you based an accusation against a high official of the State Depart-
ment.
Senator McCarthy. Not my files. I said the State Department files.
I didn't say copies of files in my possession. If the Senator will read
that statement, he will see that I said "the files'' — referring to the
State Department files, the FBI files, the Civil Service Commission
files — "are replete with that information." I repeat it now. I repeat
it. Senator, that every Avord that I have given you, every piece of
evidence as to what those files contain, you will find is there if you
will get the files.
Senator Green. I am going to be persistent, and I am going to get
an answer out of this or else get your refusal to answer. My question
is whether there is in your files the name of this individual.
Senator McCarthy. I think I know the name of the individual.
Senator Green. That isn't what I asked.
Senator McCarthy. Let me finish. Senator, please. I am reason-
ably certain I know his name.
Senator Green. That isn't what I asked.
38 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
Senator McCarthy. You be quiet until I finish.
Senator Tydings. Let the witness answer in his own way.
Senator McCarthy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I am reasonably certain I know his name. I have nothing in my
files upon which I can base a definite, documented answer. There-
fore, I am not going to guess for you. Senator. I have told you this,
and let me make it clear. Unless I have seen the document showing
the name of that individual, I will not try and give it to you. Is that
clear ?
Senator Green. The question is perfectly clear, but the answer is
not. The question is : Is there in your files the name of this individual ?
Senator McCarthy. Senator, I don't know, because I don't know
definitely what his name is. There are many names in my file. Un-
doubtedly his name is in some of those files ; but, unless I know defi-
nitely that he is this particular State Department official, I can't
answer that.
Now the Senator can get that. He can find it out very simply. He
can get it in half an hour by calling Secretary Acheson.
Senator Tydings. Senator, you can proceed in a moment, but, with-
out wishing to be captious about it, I don't think the witness is testi-
fying to the accusation here by telling us over and over and over again
what we can do. 1 think the witness ought to be more responsive to
the direct question. I say this in the best of temper and with no desire
to cut him off, but I do think he ought to say "I have it" or "I haven't
it" and not how we can get it.
Senator McCarthy. I have made it very clear, Mr. Chairman. I
am sure the chairman is not dull. No one has ever accused him of
that. The chairman understands exactly what the situation is. He
knows the names in that file. I think I know them. I haven't seen
the original. I haven't seen a photostatic copy of the original so I
cannot tell this committee whether the name is John Jones or Pete
Smith, and until I can give them that information I will not attempt
to guess at it. This is not going to be any guessing contest so far as
I am concerned, gentlemen.
Senator Green. That is just what we want to avoid — a guessing
contest.
Here is an individual, a high official in the State De]:>artment, against
whom there is an accusation. I am not asking what his name is; I am
asking whether in your files his name is.
Senator McCarthy. I have just gotten through telling you that I
do not know definitely what his name is, period.
Senator Green. That is not the answer to the question.
Senator McCarthy. That is the answer you will get.
Senator Green. I am not asking you what the name is. I am asking
you whether you know the name is there — whether you know it or not.
Senator McCarthy. If I do not know definitely what his name is,
how can I know whether it is there? Your name is in my files, per-
haps ; I don't know. Not as a Communist, you understand.
Senator Green. I would not be surprised, in view of the long list
of very prominent people and people of highest position in the world.
I should judge it an honor to be on some of those lists you have put in.
Senator McCarthy. Just a minute. If you think it is an honor to be
on any of the lists that I am giving you — strike that.
STATE DEPARTAIENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 39
Senator Hickenloopek. Mr. Chairniaii, I might suggest that these
organizations have been declared subversive by the Attorney General,
^vlio is a member of the Senator's own party, and it is an official de-
termination of the Federal Government bodies that these are sub-
versive organizations. If the Senator can take comfort out of that
Senator Green. The list seemed to be bipartisan so far as I can
distinguish.
Senator Hickenloopek. But the organizations have been declared
to be subversive.
Senator Green. As I have said several times, and I am going to
stick to it, I haven't J'et an answer to ni}^ question. Do you know
whether the name of the individual to whom you have referred, ap-
pearing in your files, not only once but the files are replete with his
name, do you know whether his name is there or not ?
Senator McCarthy. Let's first answer the first part of your ques-
tion. We will go right through it. You will get all the answers you
want. It may not be the one you want. Can we have an agreement
that Avhen you are talking I will be quiet, and when I am talking you
will be quiet ?
Senator Tydings. The witness will proceed until he has completed
his answer, without interruption.
Senator McCarthy. Can we have that understanding?
Senator Green. I think that is an understanding.
Senator McCarthy. You are speaking about honorable people,
honorable organizations. Here is what Secretary Acheson said about
the organizations that I have cited to you. He said this 4 days ago.
Referring to the security files, he said :
Participation in one or more of tlie parties or movements referred to above,
or in organizations whicli are fronts for, or are controlled by, any such party
or movement, either by membership therein, taking part in its executive direction
or control, contribution of funds thereto, attendance at meetings, employment
thereby, registration to vote as a member of such party, or signature on petition
to elect a member of such party to political office or to accomplish any other
purpose supported by such a party, or by written evidences or oral expressions
by speeches or otherwise, or political or economic or social views —
he lists those people as bad security risks. I am giving you the names
of organizations that come within the purview of that. If you think
these are honorable organizations you are entitled to that opinion.
Now you asked the next question. Now you say, "Is there in your
file the name of the State Department official referred to in the secret
files of case No. 14?" I have told you that I have a strong suspicion
as to who the individual is. I have no way of definitely knowing.
There is in my file the names of individuals whom I suspect of being
mentioned in that particular file, but not being able to say definitely
it is John Jones or Pete Smith, I cannot tell you whether he is in the
file or not.
Senator Tydings. I would like to interject for a moment. Inas-
much as a charge has been made by a witness now on the stand that
attempts have been made to doctor the record in the State Depart-
ment, I would like to serve notice on the witness now that we may
subpena or ask him to deliver his own files, so that we can check as
to whether the information that he has obtained in his photostatic
copies ties in with the loyalty and other files that we will, I hope, in
the course of time examine, and I wnll ask the Senator now to keep
68970—50 — pt. 1 4
4U STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY DsWESTIGATION
those files intact, with all the papers in them, so that we may make the
comparison at the proper time to see whether or not the State Depart-
ment files and the photostats which he allegedly had of them contain
the name.
Senator McMahon. ]\Ir. Chairman, as I understand it, yesterday
you notified Senator McCarthy that this case was to be the subject
of discussion today.
Senator Tydings. That's right.
Senator McMAHoisr. I take it. Senator, that you have prepared your-
self and brought with you everj^thing that you have on case 14 ?
Senator McCarthy. Everything of anv moment that I have on case
14 has been read into the Congressional Record.
Senator McMahon. Will you show me what you have on case 14 ?
Senator McCarthy. Just read the Congressional Kecord.
Senator McMahok. Will you produce for my inspection what you
have on case 14 ?
Senator JNIcCarthy. I am telling you what I have is in the Congres-
sional Record.
Senator McMahon. Or do I have to get a subpena for it, Senator?
Senator McCarthy. Senator, I have gotten through telling just now
that what I have in case 14 is in the Congressional Record.
Senator McMahon. Just a minute. Senator, if you please.
Senator McCarthy. May I finish?
Senator Tydings. Quiet, first.
Senator McCarthy. May I finish the answer?
Senator McMahon. I have a question pending, and I insist upon
an answ^er to it.
Senator Tydings. Will the reporter read the pending questions ?
The Reporter (reading) : "Will you produce for my inspection
what you have on case 14?"
Senator McCarthy. If somebody will hand me the Congressional
Record I will produce for you all I have on case 14. It is a very com-
plete case in the Congressional Record. That is what I have on case 14.
Senator McMahon. Senator, you have brought with you your file on
case 14 and all related papers, according to your own statement, of
any consequence. Will you or will you not produce them for my in-
spection right now?
Senator McCarthy. I will produce for your inspection everything
I have in case 14. It is all in the Congressional Record. That Con-
gressional Record refers to secret State Department files. The infor-
mation with regard to what is in those files is in the Congressional
Record. If the Senator questions the accuracy of what I have put into
the record, the only way he can determine — the only way he can deter-
mine — whether that is accurate or not is by getting the State Depart-
ment, the FBI, and the Civil Service Commission files.
So there is no question in your mind, all of the information, all of
the information, which I have on case No. 14 is in the Congressional
Record. If the Senators wants that produced, I will have to ask him
to ask one of his clerks to get me a copy of the Record, turn to page
2050 and 2051, and he will find everything.
Senator McMahon. Mr. Chairman, I again direct a simple question
to the Senator from Wisconsin, and I ask the Senator whether or not
he will produce for my inspection and the committee's inspection every-
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 41
thing that he has on case No. 14 in his possession. I am not interested
in looking at the Congressional Record; I am interested in what infor-
mation the Senator has in his possession, and I would lilce to see it. I
would like to see it now. 1 f he won't give it to me, that is his privilege.
Senator McCarthy. I am glad to give it to you, Senator.
Senator McMaiion. Let me have it, Senator.
Senator McCarthy. Let me finish, please.
Senator Tydings. Let the witness answer.
Senator McCarthy. I will be glad to give it to you. I gave the
Senator all of the information I had on case No. 14. That is the
extent of the file. It is all in the Congressional Record. Now, if the
Senator questions the truthfulness of that, the only way he can deter-
mine it so far as I know is by supenaing the files. All the information
is in the Congressional Record.
Senator Tydings. Maybe I can, by being an observer to the colloquy
that is going on, help to clear it up by asking one question. Have
3^ou in your possession evidence, papers, photostatic copies, or other
matters which wall support what you put in the Congressional Record ?
Senator McCarthy. Kave I in my possession evidence, papers,
photostatic copies, on everything that is in the Congressional Record?
Senator Tydings. I didn't ask you that.
Senator McCarthy. Let me answer, will you, Senator ?
Senator Tydings. Let me state the question again. Senator. Have
you in your possession any paper, memorandum, photostatic copies,
affidavits, other materials, which will support the charges in whole
or in part that you put in the Congressional Record in case 14, to wit,
that a high official in the State Department has attempted to doctor
the records of the loyalty committee passing on applicants for office
and those who held office ?
Senator McCarthy. Everything in the Congressional Record, in-
sofar as I know, is absolutely true. There is no doubt about that.
If the Senator questions that he can determine it very easily. As to
slips of paper, notes, and such like, there are none that I can give
the Senator.
Senator Tydings. I didn't ask you that. I didn't ask you whether
there were any you could give me. In order to end the controversy,
I asked you if you had in your possession any material, memoranda,
affidavits, photostats, or other papers or evidence, to support any or
all of the charges made by you in case 14. The answer is you either
have them or you don't have.
Senator McCarthy. All of the supporting evidence, all of it and
plenty of it, documents, affidavits, what liaA^e you, all of that evidence,
is in the files and not in my office. By the files I mean a combination
of the four files, State Department loyalty files; personnel files, the
Civil Service Commission files, and the FBI files. That is where all
of the supporting documents are. They are not in my office.
Senator Tydings. I didn't ask you that, but I will go back to Senator
McMahon, and I ask his pardon for interrupting. I thought maybe
that one question might bring it to a head.
Senator, I apologize.
Senator McMahon. That's all right. Senator.
I am left with the unfortunate opinion that the Senator has material
in his possession on this case which lie refuses to turn over to the com-
jnittee. He again and again has stated that we can go to other places
/
42 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVEiSTIGATION
to get it. He again says that everything he has he has put in the
Record. But I tliink if I were in the Senator's place, what I would
do is say, "Yes, here is what I have on case 14" and turn it over to
us. I am very much disappointed, Mr. Chairman, that the Senator
takes the attitude that he does, and won't give the committee the mat-
ters that are in his possession which bear upon this very serious case.
I regret very much that the Senator takes that attitude.
Senator McCarthy. May I answer that, Mr. Chairman?
And I regret very much, Senator, that this committee seems so
vitally interested in find out whether they can get the names of anyone
in the State Department, good, loyal Americans, who may have given
me information. You are not fooling me, Senator. I know what you
want. I know what the State Department wants. They want to find
out who is giving out information on these disloyal people so their
heads will fall, and so far as I am concerned, gentlemen, no heads of
any loyal people in the State Department will fall, none of those heads
will fall, because of their having possibly imparted information to me.
You are not fooling me. Senator. You know the information — let
me finish. You know the information is in tlie file. You know you
can get it. You know that if you want any of those names you can
get them.
I know — I have been informed and I am sure of it — that the State
Department is very curious to know whether or not someone in that
Department is telling me who has communistic activities, who belong
to these Commie-front organizations. I know they want those names.
I am very surprised and disappointed. Senator, that this committee
would become the tool of the State Department, Senator, not to get
at the names, the information, of those who are bad security risks, but
to find out for the Department who may have given me information so
those people can be kicked out of their jobs tomorrow.
Senator Tydings. I am not going to ask a question. I just want to
say that the chairman of this committee, and I am sure with the sup-
port of all members of the committee, is going to get every scrap of
evidence in any files, any place, that have to do with any charges
brought before this committee. I said this investigation is going to
be thorough, and I don't mean maybe. So far as that is concerned,
the investigation will go to the -nth degree on every scrap of evidence
that is available.
But that has nothing to do with the immediate matter before the
committee.
Senator McMahon. Now, Mr. Chairman, I am profoundly shocked
by the irresponsible speech that has just been made by the Senator
from Wisconsin. His imputation of me, of the members of this com-
mittee, of any such motive in asking that question, is something I
repudiate and denounce. It is unworthy of any Senator of the United
States.
We are engaged in responsible business. If there is to be this kind
of irresponsible talk, it won't be in the best interests of the United
States. I say to you. Senator, when you start making charges of that
kind against me you had better reflect on it more than once.
Senator McCarthy. Senator, you can be sure that everything I
say has been very carefully reflected upon.
Senator McMahon. I doubt it.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 43
Senator jNIcCartht. And I think that that attempt — I know — is
going to continue through this hearing, the very clear-cut, obvious
attempt, not to get at the facts, not to find out what is in the files. You
know you can find it out. But this obvious attempt to try and find
the name of some State Department official, some loyal person who
has come down to a Senator and said, "Now here are facts. Here are
things that should be brought to the attention of the Senate" — to
try to get their names so their heads will fall I think is shameful. I
think it is.
Senator Tydings. The questions which I directed to you, and I as-
sume that the questions which other members of the committee have
directed to j'ou, are not calculated by any stretch of the imagination to
ask you where you got this matter and I had no thought of that in the
question. My question simply was. Did you. have the matter and
would you be willing to tell the committee what that matter is? I
don't want to know who gave it to you. I don't want to know how
you got it. But I would like to know what it is so that we can have
evidence here upon which to proceed.
Now, the question that I asked was simply this : Have you in your
possession any memorandum, any affidavit, any papers, any photo-
stats or other material, which would tell us who this individual is —
not where j'ou got it, not how you got it, not who gave it to you, but,
have you the material ?
Senator McCartht. Let me answer the first half of your question
first. You say it isn't your intention, it is not your desire to find out
where I have gotten this information. The Senator from Connecticut,
Mr. McMahon, has just ordered me to produce my file and give the en-
tire file to him so he can check and see who did give me this informa-
tion. *
Now, No. 2, you have asked whether T have in my possession photo-
stats, affidavits, and such like. I again tell you that all of the affidavits,
all of the photostats
Senator Tydings. Why don't you say you haven't got it or you have
got it ?
Senator McCarthy. Let me say all the photostats are easily acces-
sible to you. You can get them without any trouble at all. They are
all in those files.
Senator Tydings. If we subpena those records, which I hope we
will never "do, we would get the names of the people who gave the
information to you, if that is in your file. I am not after that at all.
I am after the memoranda and the photostats of the State Department
and other loyalty agency files that might be in your records, not who
gave them to you. Do you or do you not have that information in your
possession ?
Senator McCarthy. Senator, if you are after the material in the
State Department files don't come to my office. Go to the State De-
partment. You will get it there. Senator.
Senator IIickenlooper. ]\Ir. Chairman, may I suggest that there
has been reference to legal procedure here in the past. There is such
a rule, of course, which is well known to all members of this com-
mittee, as best evidence, and the courts without exception recognize
that hearsay or copied documents are not available when the best
evidence, which is the original and fountainhead of information, is
available. I suggest that the files are available which the Senator
44 STATE DEPARTMEIN^T EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
says will substantiate his cliarges, and the best evidence is the files
which are the property of the United States Government. I think all
he is sno-gesting is that we get the files, which is the fountainheacl
of information, and I hope we do get them.
Senator Tydings. Senator Green?
Senator Green. ]\Ir. Cliairman, in reph^ to what my distinguished
colleague has just said and to remind him, these cases, in spite of the
obvious attempt of the witness, are not being answered on the basis
Mdiich he assumes. "We are not asking for the best evidence as to
what has happened. We are seeking to know tlie basis that he had
for his charges on the floor of the Senate.
Senator PIicKENLOOPEPt. That is exactly what disturbs me.
Senator Green. I would like to finish my statement, if I may. May
I proceed?
Senator Tydings. Go ahead.
Senator Green. The point is, what basis has the Senator for his
charges on the floor of the Senate ? Or was it simply guesswork in the
hopes that it might start a general investigation of the State Depart-
ment files? He did not limit himself to a simple general statement
that he suspected the State Department of having certain papers and
doing certain things. He made specific charges, and my questions
were directed to finding out what was the basis that he had for making
the charges, or whether he had any. He has made the charges, and he
says now, as I understand it, if my understanding is correct — perhaps
my mind doesn't follow his; perhaps he doesn't wish to give it — but
however, he has not answered the question, which was to find out
•whether he had or had not a basis for the charges.
He says, "Go elsewhere and prove if my charges are false or true."
That isn't the point. The point isn't getting the best evidence of the
facts of whether there has been disloyalty or not. The point is whether
the Senator had any basis for his charges which he has made, and
which he said he was ready to prove before this committee.
Senator Tydings. Senator SfcCarthy, I want to repeat again
Senator McCarthy. May I first ansvrer the Senator's question?
Senator T^iT)iNGS. There is no answer. He was making an observa-
tion to Senator Hickenlooper's proposition. Pie didn't ask you a
question.
Senator McCarthy. I thought it was a question.
Senator Tydings. I would like to say again and again and again
and again and again and again that this committee will exhaust every
avenue, investigate, request, and I feel sure obtain, all the files that
are in question.
Senator McMahon. Except his.
Senator Tydings. Just a moment.
That we will do. The pertinency of this particular question grows
out of your own testimony, where you say :
In this case a CSA report of September 2. 1947, is replete with informatiou
covering the attempts of a high State Department official to induce several
individuals who had signed affidavits reflecting adversely upon the employees
to repudiate their affidavits.
Now, inasmuch as the charge is here made that there have been
attempts to alter these records which we will in due course examine, it
is important for us to know when we do examine them whether they
are all there, whether the things that you have asserted we will find
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 45
are all there, without any alteration, and if 3'ou have photostats that
were made prior to this hearing and prior to the time you made your
testimony on the floor, it is important for us to know that the same
record is still there, and the only way we can be sure of that is to
compare your photostats that were taken before you spoke on the
floor of the Senate on February 20 with what we shall hnd in those
tiles, otherwise we shall never know whether they have been tampered
with, which you A^ourself, in your own testimony, say was the result
of an attempt, at least, to alter them.
So therefore you can see, as a good lawyer and judge yourself, the
pertinency of making sure that the best evidence is all there. It is
right. The Senator from Iowa is perfectly right. We must have the
best evidence to draw our conclusions upon. But we must proceed
so that we know that when we get to the best evidence the best
evidence has not been altered or changed during the course of the
controvers}'.
So, therefore, I would like you to see the pertinency of this
matter and tell us whether or not you have in your possession photo-
stats or other material that will substantiate the charge made in
case 14.
Senator McCarthy. Let me answer that, Senator — and we are not
fooling each other in this case, you understand.
Senator Tydings. I am not fooling anybody. I am out in the open
and aboveboard.
Senator ^McCarthy. You say it is important to know what photo-
stats I have, if any. I know there is nothing that the State Depart-
ment would like better than to know what photostats I have. You
have and I have heard rumors that the State Department is rifling
the files. We know that that is the kind of rumor that would be cur-
rent; we do not know whether this is true or false. We know also
that if the State Department desired to rifle any of these files it
would be very important to them to know what photostats, if any, I
had, so they won't be caught short.
I might say this : If I have any photostats, then the committee should
be interested in keeping the particular photostats which I have ab-
solutely secret '
Senator Tydixgs. You're right.
Senator McCarthy. Until they have seen the State Department
files. I think when we get through with those files. Senator, then the
general public should know definitely whether or not they have seen
all the files, and if I have any photostats in my possession they
would become extremely valuable to the committee if those photostats
only became valuable after the State Department files have been
opened. Those photostats, if I have any, would be extremely impor-
tant today to any State Department official who was desirous of rifling
a file.
Senator Tydings. Senator McCarthy, you are right.
Senator ^IcCarthy. You can lie sure of this. Senator : That I will
give this committee every bit of help I possibly can, to help them get
at the truth ; and, I will resist any attempt which, in my opinion, is
aimed toward giving the State Department officials information which
they are not entitled to at this time, and any attempt to aid them in
the way of a whitewash of any individual.
You can be sure of that help from me, Senator
46 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
Senator Tydings. Waving aside the imputation that the committee,
which I do not think you meant, is going down to help the State De-
partment, in the event any papers are missing, or any other imputa-
tion that might be there — as chairman of the subcommittee, and speak-
ing for all the members of the committee, I would consider it a mat-
ter of extreme secrecy, and pledge on our part that we keep your
jBles away from everybody so that when w^e did investigate the State
Department files, they w^ould have no knowledge of what was in your
files at all. We would simply use them for comparison, to see whether
or not the allegation that tampering has been attempted, had actually
taken place; and, under no circumstances would the files that you have
be commended to the State Department so that they, if they had peo-
ple of this kind down there, could alter them.
I see your point and I agree with it, and it was not our intention to
get these files to turn over to the State Department so they would
have any knowledge of it.
The point in getting it was to make sure that the allegation which
you have made in this particular case has not been carried into prac-
tice in this, or any other case, to wit, tampering with these files.
Senator McCarthy. Let me assure the chairman that
Senator Tydings. I agree with you.
Senator McCarthy. In my opinion, if the committee employs a
competent staff, in my opinion we will have no difficulty whatsoever
in determining whether or not the complete files are turned over
to the committee.
Senator Tydings. We do not want to detain your testimony. I am
going to summarize it here in the record, just as I understand it:
That you, this morning, will not give us the name of this individual ;
that you are not saying that you do or do not have the name of this
individual
Senator McCarthy. That is incorrect.
Senator Tydings. In this file.
Senator McCaritiy. That is incorrect.
Senator Tydings. Then, you do have the name of this individual in
the files.
Senator McCarthy. I have told you about 10 times, over and
over — I have told you before that I have a strong suspicion, I have
great reason to believe I know his name. I have seen no original
document, no photostat of an original document which proves to me
conclusively that I have his name ; and until I can give you the defi-
nite information as to what his name is, I do not feel I should give
you any name ; and I have stated also that you can get the name by go-
ing to the files
Senator Tydings. I understand that ; but then, do I understand you
to say that you do not know whether you have the name or not?
Senator McCarthy. No.
Senator Tydings. Wliat do I understand then ?
Senator McCarthy. Exactly what I said, Senator. T do not know
what you understand, but the record is clear. I have told you that I
ha.ve no way of definitely knowing the name of this particular in-
dividual.
Senator Tydings. You have no way of knowing it?
Senator McCarthy. Definitely knowing it. I think I know his
name. His name will be found in the files, in the secret files. The
STATE DEPARTjMEXT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 47
Senator can get those files, so if the Senator actually wants any names,
he can get them without holding up this hearing for 2 hours this
morning.
Senator Green. How do you know his name is in the secret files?
Senator McCarthy. Senator, if you question that, you can get the
files and look at them.
Senator Green. I am not asking you that. I want to know how you
know.
Senator Tydings. Answer the question.
Senator Green. The question is : You say you know the name was
in the secret files — how do you know the name is in the secret files?
Senator McCarthy^. If the Senator will get the files and look at
the files, he will find the name. He will find that everything I have
told him is in that file.
Senator Green. I am not asking whether the name is there or not.
I want to know how you know it. I cannot examine your mind.
You will have to tell us how you do know the name is in the secret
files.
Senator McCarthy. I have said before that I know ; and I am very
disappointed in this — this committee has spent now a great deal of
time trying to find out whether I will give them the name of some loyal
employee in the State Department who told me what was in the file,
who has given me the information — I am very much disappointed in
that, Senator. I think that is entirely improper. You and I know
that if I give the name of anyone I have gotten information from,
anyone over there, if his name were made known, his job would not
be worth a snap of the fingers.
Let me make it clear, if the Senator wants the name, he can get the
files and he will see the name.
Senator Green. I cannot avoid the conclusion that you are trying to
evade the question.
Senator McCarthy. You think so ?
Senator Green. I did not ask you for the name. You stated that
the name was in the secret files of the State Department. I asked you
how you knew that it was in the secret files of the State Department,
unless you have, for instance, a photostatic copy. If you say that,
that will be the answer; if that is not the answer, what is the answer?
How do you know ?
Senator McCarthy. I think the Senator should be more concerned
with finding out whether the information I have given is true or not,
than trying to find out my source of information, if any. He can find
out whether the information is true by getting the file.
Senator Green. You refuse to answer my question ?
Senator McCarthy. No; I don't refuse to answer your question.
Senator Green. Please answer it
Senator Tydings. Turn back and read the question of the Senator
from Rhode Island.
(The record was read by the reporter.)
Senator McCarthy. Again we find the thing that the chairman has
just condemned, an attempt to find out what photostats if any I may
have.
Now, Senator, let me say this : If you want to perform a ser\dce,
rather than to try to make this public information as to what if any
48 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY ESTVESTIGATTON
photostats I have, so that if this rumor is true, the rumor we hear about
rifling the files — if instead of doing that, you will try to get the secret
files — after you have gotten the files, I will give you all the aid in the
world to help determine whether or not you have the complete file.
You understand that?
Senator Green. That does not answer the question, and you know
it does not answer the question. The question wasn't that.
The question was, I am not asking you to produce the photostatic
copy, I am simply asking you how you come to that conclusion in
jour mind, that you said you knew it was in the secret files, in the
State Department.
Senator McCarthy. I came to that conclusion by all the informa-
tion that was available to me.
Senator Green. Well then, you have that information in your
files, I suppose. Is that a correct conclusion ?
Senator McCarthy. I have what information in my files?
Senator (treen. That they had the name in the secret file of the
State Department.
Senator McCarthy. I have given you all the pertinent information
I have, or all I know about the case in the Congressional Record, if
you will read that. It is a rather important case, I think. You will
find out the information in the files, you won't find it in my files.
You will find it in the State Department files.
Senator Tydings. Gentlemen, it is perfectly apparent to me, unless
the members of the committee wish to pursue this further, that the
witness does not want to disclose the information about which all the
interrogations are directed.
The question is : Shall we pursue this course further by asking the
questions again and again and again, or, shall we go on and let him
testify ? What is the committee's pleasure?
Senator Hickenlooper. Mr. Chairman, I suggest the committee go
on with the business for which the committee was set up, and listen
to the various allegations that the Senator has to make ; and then, to
do what it is my belief the committee should do — go after the origi-
nal sources of the information, instead of following this obvious
attempt to require the witness to disclose all his investigative pro-
cedures and ramified sources from which he mnj have gotten the
information.
His information is either true or it is not true. It can either be
proved or disproved by the files, and I was of the opinion that this
subcommittee was after the facts, and not after any procedure which
might become a harassment of the witness, to the avoidance of the
real purpose of this investigation.
Senator Tydings. What is your thought. Senator Green ?
Senator Green. Well, I think it is futile to continue to ask the
same questions when the witness insists on evading them and makes
a speech, instead of answering the questions. I don't know what the
chairman would suggest.
Senator Tydings. What do you suggest. Senator McMahon?
Senator McMahon. I won't put it in the record.
Senator Tydings. Senator McCarthy, go ahead with your testi-
mony; but, the chairman, on behalf of the committee, would caution
you not to lose any of these files, because we may want to, in case
No. 14, to have you verify or have verified, one or the other, the dif-
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 49
ierence in these files, between your photostats and the original copies
if an}', inasmuch as charges of tampering have been brought by you,
before the Senate in this case, and in order that we may see that there
has been no tampering, we may want to see if your photostats accord
with what we find in the files in question.
Go ahead with your testimony. Please bear that in mind how-
ever — to keep those files safe and untouched, as far as papers are
concerned, until we get a chance to come back to this.
Senator Hickenlooper. Just to clear that point up, Mr. Chairman :
I would like to ask the witness, because it is not my recollection that
the witness has specifically and formally charged that the files of
the State Department have in fact been tampered with, if he has,
I want to be clear in my own mind. I don't know what the situa-
tion is.
Senator Tydixgs. Let us leave that
Senator McCarthy. Let us make it clear, it is all a part of the
record.
The only reference I have made to the files, this does not refer to
tampering" with the files, but it referred to information in the files
in regard to attempts to get certain witnesses in this morals case to
alter their affidavits. That was not a case of tampering with the files,
but an attempt by one of the men in the State Department to get wit-
nesses to alter their affidavits. That information is all in the files.
As to any tampering with the files, that is, as the Chairman knows
as I know — once you start talking about getting files, whether it
is rumor, or true or not, the natural rumor is that the files are being
rifled and we have all heard those rumors.
The Chairman need not caution me to save anything that will be of
assistance to this committee in determining whether or not there in any
rifling of the files.
Senator Tydings. You can well see that this committee is on the
spot. You can well see that if we look into this file and unanimously
say that the charges are true, that is one thing. If we say, after look-
ing in this file, unanimously, that the charges are not sustained, that
is another thing. The inference would immediately be drawn, how-
ever, from the testimony you have made on the Senate floor, that the
files that we investigated did not contain all the papers that you
allegedly say we will find in this file.
Now, in order to make this investigation airtight, it ought to be
cleared up as to whether the file in this particular case is an accurate,
exact, and complete file in every particular; and whether these at-
tempts to fix it have succeeded or have not succeeded. If we do not
cover that point and would find these charges unsustained, the infer-
ence could be drawn, very properly, that the file was not the same
file of which you may have a photostat.
So, that is the reason I am asking you, in this and all other files, to
make sure that any photostates and other memorandum which you
have, that might be in these files, are not in any way allowed to fall
into places where they would not be cared for, or changed in any way
whatsoever.
Senator McCarthy. I sincerely hope that when the files are finally
made available, the committee will have a competent staff looking
over the files and be able to tell the committee and the public whether
the files are complete or not.
50 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
Senator Tydings. Your hopes will be fully gratified.
Senator McCarthy. That can be done, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Tydings. Your hopes will be fully gratified, and I hope
we get all the files and all the evidence when we go over it and make
a complete report without leaving anything out that comes within
the ken of this investigation.
Senator McCarthy. Yesterday, Mr. Chairman, I referred to an
individual by the name of Kenyon, who, according to the Federal
Register of 1950, was employed in the State Department, and com-
menced producing the documentary proof of her connection with 2&
organizations that had been listed either as Communist-front or sub-
versive. Last night the State Department announced that this indi-
vidual was no longer with the Department, having severed her con-
nections on January 1 of this year, or December 31.
Even though tliis individual may no longer be with the Department,
the case, in my opinion, is still extremely important in that it will shed
considerable light on the workings of our loyalty program.
In the past when the loyalty of any Government employee has been
questioned, the case has been shrugged off with the statement, "Oh,
he has been cleared by the Loyalty Board." I assume that during
these hearings, the same will be repeated often. In fact, the Secre-
tary of State's office attempted to clear one of the cases I mentioned
a short time ago with that identical statement — "He has been cleared
by the Loyalty Board." Therefore, it is extremely important to know
just wdiat "being cleared by the State Department's Loyalty Board'^
means.
Senator Tydtnos. Senator, if I may interrupt, when you are refer-
ring to the "Loyalty Board," is that the Loyalty Board of the State
Department, or which one are you referring to? There are five or six
of these agencies.
Senator McCarthy, That is a good point. I think it should be
agreed, and should be clear that each agency has its own Loyalty
Board.
Senator Green. Which one is that?
Senator McCarthy. I am referring to the State Department's Loy-
alty Board, obviously, because Kenyon's case was considered by the
State Department Loyalty Board. She was cleared by that State
Department Loyalty Board.
Senator Tydings. Go ahead.
Senator McCarthy. Let me make this clear, also : That there is an
Appeals Board, a Civil Service Commission Appeals Board. I think
it should be clear, at least as far as I can determine, that the Civil
Service Appeals Board, or Civil Service Loyalty Board gets no juris-
diction over a case in which the agency board has cleared the individ-
ual. If, however, the individual has been discharged because of
disloyalty, or being a bad security risk, he can appeal to the Civil
Service Commission Appeals Board
Senator Tydings. May I interrupt again ?
Senator McCarthy. Yes.
Senator Tydings. The committee will get a list of each one of these
investigative agencies, and each one of these Boards, and each one of
these agencies that have to do with the clearing of an individual.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 51
Senator McCarthy. I might say I have that complete list here,
Mr. Chairman. Whenever you want to introduce it in the record, I
-u'ill he clad to do it.
Senator Tydix(;s. Let's have it now, if you have it handy; and, we
will have it put in the record at this point; but, I simply wanted to
ask the Senator, in the future — when he refers to any particular Board,
it would be of help to the connnittee in its i n vest iirat ions if he could
identify the Board he has in mind, so that we would not have to hunt
around and find out which one it is.
Senator McCarthy. I am glad to know the chairman and I agree on
something.
Senator Tydings. We agree on a lot of things, but not on our ques-
tions and answers this morning.
Senator McCarthy, I think it is an excellent idea to keep these
different Boards well identified, because some of them have been doing
a rather good job.
Let me make this clear, if I may: The Civil Service Commission
Loyalty Board, even though it has no jurisdiction over a case that has
been approved by the State De]iartment Loyalty Board, can pick
up that case and conduct what is known, I believe, as a post audit on
that. In their post audit, however, they have no right to take action
and say that that man is disloyal, and they can be overruled by the
Secretary of State. You will find, and I will give you cases as we
go along, a number of cases in which the State Department Loyalty
Board has given an individual a completely clean bill of health. The
Civil Service Commission Loyalty Board picked that case up in a
post audit
Senator Tydings. If you will allow me to interrupt you?
Senator McCarthy. Yes.
Senator Tydings. AVliat we will have to do, Senator McCarthy, in
order to make this investigation complete, is, if it is a subject of in-
vestigation, to immediately set up cross references, and follow case A,
the name of case A through all the other Boards to see what is in the
file, pro and con, all the way through, by a series not only of direct
examinations of the record in question, but by cross checks on the other
records, and that is what you want, and that is what we will do.
Senator jNIcCartpiy. I might sa}-, sir, we will have the question of
the jurisdiction of the various boards clear if you take, for example,
case No. 1," which I referred to on the Senate floor. In that case, the
State Department's Loyalty Board gave this individual a clean bill
of health. The Civil Service Commission picked that up on their
own — you understand it was not appealed, but picked it up on their
own — and audited that and sent it back indicating their dissatisfac-
tion with the Loyalty Board's findings. However, the State Depart-
ment's Loyalty Board can, if they care to, close out the case, unless the
Secretarj^ then says, "I wnll depend upon the Civil Service Commis-
sion's Loyalty Board and discharge this man."
As far as I know, he has not done that in any case.
Senator Tydings. Well, we will examine the whole record; we will
check, double-check, up and down and diagonally check to make sure
everything is checked all the waj^ through.
Senator McCarthy. I want to commend the committee's attention
especially to those cases that have been picked up by the Appeals Board
52 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
and checked, and sent back, because tliey felt that the Loyalty Board
did not do its job.
Therefore, it is extremely important to know just what being;
"cleared by the State Department Loyalty Board" means.
We have here documents to indicate that this individual belonged
to at least 28 different Communist-front organizations, I understand
tliat the FBI ^ave the State Department a detailed report on this
individual showing that she belonged not merely to 28 but to con-
siderably over 28 Communist-front organizations.
I urge that tlie committee immediately subpena the records. What
is of utmost importance in this case is to determine why the Loyalty
Board passed this individual with that type of report from the FBI
iri its iiIgs
Senator Tydings. The FBI
Senator McCarthy. I stated, I think, to get the complete record
you must subpena the State Department records, the Civil Service
Commission records, the FBI records — —
Senator Tydings. I did not understand whether you said the record
or records.
Senator McCarthy. Records.
. Senator Tydings. You mean plural ?
Senator McCarthy. Plural.
Senator Tydings. Go ahead.
Senator McCarthy. I might say, in my opinion, there is not even
any remote possibility of any FBI record being tampered with. So,
when you get the FBI record
Senator Tydings. We are satisfied that is so.
Senator McCarthy. That is why I insist, in all these cases, in order
to have the complete record, we get all four records.
I urge the committee immediately to subpena these records which
are of the utmost importance in this case to determine why the Loyalty
Board passed this individual with that type of report from the FBI
in its files.
This is doubly important in view of Secretary Acheson's statement
the other day. He says :
iParticipation in one or more of the parties or movements referred to above,
or in organizations which are fronts for, or are controlled by, any sueh party
or movement, either by membership therein, taking part in its executive direction
or control, contribution of funds thereto, attendance at meetings, employment
thereby, registration to vote as a member of such a party, or signature of petition
to elect a member of such a party to political office or to accomplish any other
purpose supported by such a party ; or by written evidences or oral expressions
by speeches or otherwise, or political, economic, or social views.
Now, in answer to Senator Bridges' question, "Would you say that
a person who is known to associate with members of Communist-front
organizations would be a security risk?" That isn't merely referring
to the members of the front, but is referring to people who associate
closely with them, and Secretary Acheson made the following reply :
That is one of the matters that must be taken into consideration under the-
regulations which I have just read to you.
In this connection, I think the committee will find, when they sub-
pena these records, that the Department Loyalty Board — I do not
like to use the words "Loyalty Board'" in this case — but the State'
Department Loyalty Board, even though they had the complete file
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 53
on the Coinmiinist-front oroaiiizjitions of this individual, did not call
her down to ask her a single question, or any explanation of this long
list of subversive activities.
I commend to the attention of the Appropriations Committee this
and other cases which 1 shall present showing just exactly the type
of individuals this Board calls loyal.
The next case which I ishall present to the committee is inlinitely
worse than this one, but the Loyalty ]^oard still placed its stamp of
ai)proval on him.
Senator (irken. jMay I interrupt 'f
Senator Tydincjs. Senator McCarthy, have you com[)leted now what
3'ou want to tell us about case No. 1 ? Am I correct in that ?
Senator IMcCartiiy. I have about 24 documents which have not
been
Senator Tydings. That is what I was going to ask you about.
Is it your intention to put these other documents in the record now,
so as to have them in connotation with case No. 1 ?
Senator ]\IcCaktiiy. I think that is very important.
Senator Tytuxgs. Put them in now, if you will.
Senator McCarthy. I will, if the Chair has no objection.
Senator Tydings. I haA'e no objection. I think the documents sup-
})ortin.g each case, if placed in the record while that case is before us,
would hei]) us to further consider it, rather than having them put in
at a later date.
Senator McCarthy. I agree fully.
Senator Tydixgs. Have you the documents now ?
Senator ]\IcCarthy. May I finish my reading here ?
Senator Tydixgs. I thought you were on case No. 2 now^
Senator McCarthy. No; talking about the Loyalty Board. The
Senator interrupted, and wanted to ask a question. '
Senator Green. If I may ask a question here — you referred to the
Loyalty Board of the State Department, made several references to it.
Senatory McCarthy. That is correct.
Senator Green. About its actions and the way it acted. Do joii
know who the head of the Board is ? ?
Senator jNIcCarthy. There is a panel of about nine. Senator. They
are pulled in, two or three at a time, so you never who the head of
an}^ particular Loyalty Board is.
The head -of the Board as a whole is a Mr. Snow, but
Senator Tydings. Give us his full name.
Senator McCarthy. I cannot give you his full name.
Senator Green. Gen. Conrad Snow.
Senator McCarthy. That is right ; but, you uderstand, he may or
may not be on 10 consecutive panels. You see, if a particular case is
being considered. Snow may be on this; he may not be. You have, I
think, nine individuals. I think you raise a good point. I think it is
very important. Take, for example, in this case and the next case I
cite, that w^e find what specific individuals were on that panel or were
sitting as the Loyalt}' Board. Undoubtedly, there are some fine indi-
viduals in that panel of nine, but there is something radically wrong
with the individuals who will take a case where there are 28 — or more
than that, according to the FBI file, in that case — 28 Communist-
front connections and passed like that, without even calling upon the
individual for an explanation.
54 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
I doubt very much that Mr. Snow was on that. I do not know.
I might say that I do not know him personally ; I know very little
about him. I am doing this, however — at the appropriate time I will
give the committee some very interesting information about some of
the members of the Loyalty Board.
Senator Green. I may help you explain that temporary lack in your
information.
General Snow's father was formerly president of the New Hamp-
shire State Senate, and New Hampshire State Supreme Court, and he
is now the head and therefore the responsible head of the Loyalty
Board.
You referred to the Appropriations Committee, and to Senator
Bridges. I happened to be on it and was there when Senator Bridges
was being asked about General Snow, and you have not given what
he said about him. I thought you might like to know it.
My colleague. Senator McMahon, asked Senator Bridges what
Conrad Snow's reputation was, and Senator Bridges replied
"Excellent."
I will not go any further, because if I do you will accuse me of
bringing politics into that, but
Senator McCaetht. I would not accuse you of that.
Senator Green. I asked him about that, and he seems to be of the
same politics as Senator Bridges.
Senator McCarthy. I would not accuse you of playing politics.
Senator Hickeni coper. That would contribute to the proof that he
was a man of excellent ability.
Senator Green. I came to the defense of the Loyalty Board and,
I will not say accusation, but information that everything was not
right.
Senator Tydings. I do not think Senator McCarthy said that the
loyalty board was unpatriotic or disloyal or Communist-ridden. He
has not made any charge like that so far.
Senator McCarthy. Let me say this, Mr. Chairman : That, if the
verj^ able Senator sat on a case such as this, or especially the next case,
and gave this man a clean bill of health, I wmild say that he was in-
competent from then on to sit on a Loyalty Board. I can only judge
by the results that come from the Board. As I say, I do not know
whether your ISIr. Snow sat on the board in this case or not.
Senator Green. Again, my point is-
Senator McCarthy. Let me say this, if Mr. Snow
Senator Tydings. General Snow.
Senator ISIcCarthy (continuing). Was one of the men who gave
a clean bill of health to the next case, then I would say that Snow,
or anyone else on tliat Board is incompetent to sit further.
Senator Green. Let me comment tliat he is not "my" Mr. Snow ; and,
furthermore, I do not tliink he has done anything yet to be reduced in
rank from "General" to "Mr."
Senator McCarthy. Tliank you. Senator.
Mr. Chairman, I have here information which I think the committee
may want.
We have first, if I may label it "Exhibit No. 1"
Senator Tydings. What did yon put in yesterday? You had better
go on from there.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 55
Senator JNIt (Ivrtiiy. Well noAv, how many did we have in yesterday ;
do you Tenieniber ?
Senator Tvdixgs. Start from the back of the alphabet.
Senator jNIcCartiiy. Let me hand those to the chairman, and mark it
as you like.
The lirst exhibit is a list of all the Department loyalty boards. The
second is a memorandum which I will give the Chair, and which is a list
of all the regional boards.
Senator Tydtngs. Will the Senator desist just a moment until we
get a chance to look at these ?
Senator Greex. I think it ought to be put in testimony.
Senator Ttdings. You mean, it ought to be read ?
Senator Green. Yes.
Senator Tydixgs. A^liat is your wish on this? To put it all in
testimony with or without reading ?
Senator McCarthy. That was gotten from the Civil Service Com-
mission. You might want to know^ the source before you decide that ;
it was gotten from the Civil Service Commission. I called the Civil
Service Commission. I believe it is a Mr. Malloy or something like
that, and he sent it over. So, I cannot vouch for its accuracy, but
assume the Commission can.
Senator Greex. I think we should have somebody who can vouch
for its accuracy.
Senator Tydixgs. The question before us now is : The Senator from
Wisconsin has offered this ; does the committee want it read ?
Senator McMahon. What is it ?
Senator Tydixgs. It is a list of the different, I suppose, inves-
tigating
Senator McCarthy. Let me withdraw it, if you are going to read
that long document.
Senator Greex. Tell us how many there are.
Senator ^McCarthy. I would say there are about 50 pages there.
Senator Greex^. I mean, how many loyalty boards are there through
which individuals are screened — how many ?
Senator McCarthy. Senator, every agency has one. I can go over
this and count them.
Senator Greex. The State Department
Senator McCarthy. One loyalty board is in the State Department.
Senator Greex^. There are screenings below, lower than the Loyalty
Boards ; are there not ?
Senator McCarthy. There is one loyalty board in the State De-
partment.
Senator Greex. Yes, but are there not screenings below that level?
Senator McCarthy. By "screenings," I am not sure if I know what
you mean.
Senator Hickenlooper. ^Yhat they have been burning the last 3
months
Senator Greex^. Examinations of the record and character of indi-
viduals, whether they are good security risks.
Senator McCarthy. I believe a man's superior would have the
right to examine his record.
Senator Greex^. The FBI has one, and the Civil Service Commis-
sion has one.
Senator ^McCarthy. Let's get clear on the FBI.
68970 — 50 — pt. 1 5
56 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
Senator Green. That shows how justified my question is.
Senator McCarthy. Let's get clear on the FBI. The FBI does no
screening;. The FBI has taken the sixteen thousand-odd names, and
they run them through what is known as a name check ; and if a man
has been previously investigated, if there is something in the record
on him, then his name comes out; and then, if the State Department
wants an investigation of that man, they get it.
The FBI then sends the information over the State Department.
The FBI makes no recommendations. They do not say, "Discharge
this man," or "Do not discharge him."
They give all the information, and that is the last power they have
over this individual. So, these people will say that the FBI is re-
sponsible and that is entirely wrong.
You see, take in the Kenyon case, the FBI conducted an excellent
examination. Apparently the Loyalty Board just disregarded it. I
think we should make it clear that the FBI is in no way responsible
for security risks in the State Department.
Senator Tydings. Senator McCarthy, one of the papers I hold in
my hand is "United States Civil Service Connnission, Washington,
D. C." and it is signed by Seth W. Richardson, Chairman of the Loy-
alty Review Board. My question is : Is it your information that all
the employees of the State Department, in one way or another, have to
go by this loyalty board?
Senator McCarthy. No; that is incorrect.
Senator Tydings. They do not?
Senator McCarthy. No; they do not.
Senator Tydings. Wliich ones do?
Senator INIcCarthy. They go by this Board. Shall I read their
names here?
Senator Tydings. Does this Boai'd at any i^lace pass on any of the
qualifications of the peo|)le who work in the State Department?
Senator McCarthy. Wlien you say "this Board," that is a list of
regional boards, plus-
Senator Tydings. You did not set-
Senator McCarthy. I am sure I know what you mean.
Plus the Civil Service Commission's Loyalty Board, headed by
Seth W. Richardson.
Senator Tydings. I am asking you whether the head board of the
United States Civil Service Commission, headed by Seth W. Rich-
ardson, Chairman, Loyalty Review Board, former Assistant Attorne)'
General of the United States, under President Hoover I tliink it was,
is the head board and do the employees of the State Department —
does their fitness come under this Board in whole or in part for review ?
Senator McCarthy. I will answer that: No. 1 here is the Appeals
Board; No. 2. the only time a case comes officially before that Board,
speaking of the State De])artment, is when the State Department's
Board says this man is unfit, and they discharge him. Then he can
appeal to the Richardson Board. That Board then has the right to
either affirm or overrule the State Department's Loyalty Board.
If, on the other hand, the State Department's Loyalty Board gives
a man a clean bill of health, then it never officially gets to the Richard-
son Loyalty Board. However, that Board does, on occasion, pick
up a man's name in what is knoAv as a postaudit. and takes a look-see
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 57
and if tliey are dissatisfied, to the best of my information, if they are
dissatisfied, then the extent of their authority, as I understand it, is to
send the name back to the State Department Loyalty Board, indicat-
ing that they feel the State Department Loyalty Board made a mistake
and tliat they let by a bad security risk.
There are a number of those cases, you understand. Then, the
State Department Board, if they want to close the file on that indi-
vidual
Senator Tydings. Do you know whether or not the case that you
have just finished reading, and the cases that you read about on the
floor of tlie Senate, have been passed on, in whole or in part, by the
Loyalty Board of which Mr. Seth W. Richardson, former Assistant
Attorney General, was the Chairman?
Senator McCarthy. I have just gotten through telling you. Sen-
ator, that until a man has gotten an adverse ruling from the Sta^^e
Department Loyalty Board, it never gets to Mr. Richardson's Board
officially. Mr. Richardson's Board has no jurisdiction. They do not
pass through that Board.
I will, however, give you the names of some individuals who were
picked up, I do not know, by the Richardson Review Board which took
a look at them and sent the names back and said, "You made a mistake
in this man's case."
One of those cases is my case No. 1. The State Department's
Loyalty Board merely closed its file, however, and he is still there,
even though tlie Richardson Board said this man should not be in
the State Department.
Senator Tydings. I again ask the question : Do you or do yon not
know whether the cases that you read on the floor of the United
States Senate, or any of the cases you are about to bring before us,
other than the one you have just finished, have been passed on, in
whole or in part, by the Loyalty Board headed by Mr. Seth W. Rich-
ardson, former Assistant Attorney General of the United States?
Senator McCarthy. Senator, I am trying to tell you that only in
those cases in which the State Department's Loyalty Board has failed
to give clearance, do they go to the Richardson Board; and, I think in
almost each of the cases the State Department's Loyalty Board has
given clearance, the first No. 1, the case of Judge Kenyon — the State
Department Loyalty Board I understand gave lier a completely clear
bill of health so that naturally she would not appeal to the Richardson
Board.
Do you follow me on that?
Senator Tydings. Yes. Leave her out. Take up the others.
Senator McCarthy. The same is true of these cases as I will go
throug]i them, my cases, so that unless the State Department Loyalty
Board said they are out, they do not come before Seth Richardson. I
do not tliink. that is. as far as I know, I do not know of any case in
which Richardson's Board reversed a decision of the Loyalty Board
in which they said John Jones is disloyal and should go out.
That is the only time they have authority.
Senator Tydings. I understand when they have authority and when
they do not have authority.
Senator McCarthy. So that then the only cases that will get before,
or go before the Richardson Board, will be those cases that the State
58 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
Department says are' disloyal, as far as I know, according to wliat's-
his-name's testimony, Mr. Peurif oy the other day, who .said they only
discharged one man since 1947, and under the loyalty program, he
said 200 resigned, so that there would be occasion for only one review,
if we take his testimony.
Senator Tydings. I will ask you once more to try to make it plainer :
Do you, yourself, know of your own information
Senator McCaetiiy. I do not think any of these cases were ap-
pealed to Richardson's Loyalty Board. I clo not think any cases that
I gave on the Senate floor were, because if they had been, they would
not have been in the State Department.
Senator Tydings. Were they passed on, as far as you know, whether
they were appealed, or not appealed, by the Board headed by Seth
W. Richardson ?
Senator McCarthy. Senator, I •
Senator Tydinos. I say, in event they were not appealed.
Senator McCarthy. I told you, as far as I know, the Richardson
Board has no jurisdiction over a case that has not been declared dis-
loyal by the Loyalty Board.
Senator Tydings. Did not you say, in addition to the cases not ap-
pealed, that they occasionally picked up a case and examined that?
Senator McCarthy. Tliat is right.
Senator Tydings. Then, I am asking you, in addition to the ap-
peals, whether or not any of these cases were passed on, so far as you
know, by the Richardson Loyalty Appeals Board.
Senator McCarthy. I have give you cases, I cannot give you the
numbers now, I will give you cases in which the Appeals Board in a
postaudit, suggested that the Loyalty Boaid ci. id job.
I just got througli telling you the only one I could give you definitely
was case No. 1. As we go through, I will give you cases
Senator Tydings. You are not certain at this moment that any of
the cases
Senator McCarthy. Yes; I am. I told you I know some were
post-audited and sent back with unfavorable comments. I tell you
I know that. I tell you that the only case I can give you definitely
now, is case No. 1 ; but as I go through the cases, where I know, I will
give you the information. I do not have all that information. Senator.
Senator Tydings. I would like to ask you then, at your earliest
convenience, if you will give to this committee
Senator McCarthy. You know I will, Senator. You know I
am
Senator Tydings. Just a moment. If you will give to this com-
mittee the names of any witnesses against whom information, or
charges of disloyalty have been brought by you, either on the Senate
floor or before this committee — in what number, or part of the cases
you have recited has the Richardson Loyalty Board made an adverse
or a favorable or any other kind of a recommendation or finding?
Will you do that when you have an opportunity ?
Senator McCarthy. First, let's you and I understand each other.
I do not claim to know — I do not claim to have any access to the files
and know specifically what
Senator Tydings. Senator Green would like to ask you a question.
Senator McCarthy. Wait until I finish my answer to this ques-
tion, please.
""^ STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 59
Senator Tydings. All rifrlit, go jilioad.
Did you ■want to ask a question ?
Senator McCarthy. Let me answer the chairman's question.
Senator Gkeen. Certainl}^ I thouo:lit you had finished.
Senator JMcX-artiiy. Let me me make this clear, Mr. Chairman: I
would t^ive you the information on any of those that I have. I do
not have access, do not have information as to the action taken on
a oi-ent number of these cases. Some cases, I definitely know that
on a postaudit there was an adverse recommendation, I cannot call
it re])ort, but adverse information, and they were turned back to
the State Department and obviously, as I get to the cases, I will give
them to y(m.
Senator Tydings. Do the best you can.
Senator Green, what is your question ?
Senator Green. IMy question is, to get on the record the method of
screening these individuals in the State Department. Several ref-
erences have been made to that, and in the first place I do not know
whetlier j^ou call it screening, or what your definition is, but the FBI
makes an examination and a record of the man, and what all they can
find about him
Senator McCarthy. Not in all cases. Senator.
Senator Green. This is the ordinary process.
Senator McCarthy. That is not the ordinary process.
Senator Green. Then, let us get it straight what it is.
Senator McCarthy. The vast number of cases are never touched
by the FBI.
Senator Green. Where they are, the FBI is first, when they are.
Senator McCarthy. Let me give you the picture.
The State Department, as I understand, has its own investigator.
Senator Green. Then, after that, there is the head of the State
Department Investigation Branch, that comes after the FBI, in a
case where the FBI does any investigating.
Senator McCarthy. Is that a question or a statement ?
Senator Green. I am asking you whether you agree.
Senator McCarthy. I do not know the sequence of the investiga-
tions. Let me make it clear
Senator Green. Then, in that case-
Senator McCarthy. The 16,000 names were sent over to the FBI,
I understand, when the President's so-called loyalty program was
commenced. Those names were run through what is known as a
name check. Whether that is done by card index or how, I do not
know. If there had been a previous investigation of any of those
16,000, then his name would be pulled out, and in those cases, there
was an investigation by the FBI, at least some of them.
If this name check disclosed no previous bad record, then as far as
I know the FBI would make no investigation unless the State De-
partment sent M'ord over that they wanted a particular individual in-
vestigated.
So that this is clear, no matter how bad a man's record was, unless
there had been a previous investigati(m or information in the file of
the FIjI, the FBI on its own would not commence an investigation.
Is that clear?
60 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
Senator Green. We agree entirely on that, and after this prelim-
inary investigation by the FBI, then the first investigation by the State
Department itself is by their Investigation Branch, of which Mr.
Fletcher, formerly special agent of the Department of Justice, is the
head. Is that right ?
Senator McCarthy. You are asking for the sequence of investiga-
tions ?
Senator Green. Yes.
Senator McCarthy. I cannot give it to you, Senator.
Let me say, the reason I have not gone into that, I have been perfectly
satisfied that the investigative work was well done. That is not where
the difficulty started. It was the use made of tlie information.
Senator Green. I think this is correct, and if 1 am incorrect in my
statement, I wish you would correct me
Senator McCarthy. I am not sure I can correct you.
Senator Green. If you do know that I am wrong
Senator McCarthy. I will be glad to correct you, if I do.
Senator Green. Tlien, after the FBI, then comes the investigation
by the Investigating Branch of the State Department, and Mr.
Fletcher, I think, has charge of it, and he was formerly special assist-
ant of the Department of Justice; then, after that it goes up to the
Division of Security and that is under Donald L. Nicholson, formerly
an FBI man, and then, after that it goes to the State Department's
office, the Evaluation Personnel ; and after that, it goes to the Depart-
ment's Loyalty and Security Board — that is what you have made
reference to — and after that, it may, in certain cases, go to the Loyalty
Review Board under Mr. Eichardson, and the loj^alty of the
Senator McCarthy. May 1 interrupt you there. Senator?
Again, I think I should make it clear, it only goes to the Loyalty
Review Board if the State Department Board adversely finds.
Senator Green. That is what I said, in certain cases ; but in other
cases, in addition to tlie FBI, there are five different departments that
it goes through — in this screening?
Senator McCarthy. As I said, the investigative process is excellent.
I think they develop plenty of information. That is why the files are
so good. It is not the investigative agency that is to be criticized.
It is what is done with the information after it is received.
As I stated on the first case I have given you, yesterday and today,
in that case they have turned up more information than I have, con-
siderably more. They have the names of more subversive activities
in the files than I have.
Senator Green. I am glad to get your O. K. of the Department's
Investigating Department in all its grades. That is what I wanted
to get on the record.
Senator McMahon. May I ask a question, Senator?
Senator Tydings. You may, Senator McMahon.
Senator McMahon. Senator, have you the names of the members of
the Loyalty Committee that passed on this, what is her name, the
Kenyon case?
Senator McCarthy. No ; I do not, Senator. I do not know which
of them — I think it is a panel, I believe it is a panel of nine.
Senator Tydings. Is this it [exhibiting document] ?
Senator McCarthy. No; I believe it is the other one.
Senator Tydings. You took one of them back with you.
STATE DEPARTMENT EIVIPLOYEE LOYALTY IXVESTIGATION 61
Senator McCarthy. Yes; here it is. Here is the panel, Senator,
and I can give you the entire panel, if yon like.
Senator McMaiion. I would like to have each
Senator JNIcCartiiy. Conrad E. Snow, assistant leaal adviser; the
nienibors are named Bertram Barnes, career minister; Dariel St. Clair,
legislative assistant; David A. Robertson, special assistant, Office of
Near Eastern Affairs ; Theodore Achilles — I am reading what I read
after the names, indicating what the individual is doing in the State
Department — Theodore Achilles, Chief of the Division of Western
European Aifairs; Arthur G. Stevens, special assistant to the Assist-
ant Secretary of Economic Affairs; William F. Baker, Chief of the
Division of Central America and Panama Affairs; John D. Bell,
Associate Divisional Chief for European Affairs; John W. Sykes,
Legislative Service Division, Congressional Legislation ; and the con-
tact is listed as Mr. Snow, room 4013, Department of State, extension
3873.
Senator McMahox. It was three of these gentlemen, presumably,
Senator, that sat on the Kenyon case?
Senator McCarthy. Undoubtedly, I would say.
Senator McMahon. All of these cases that you have brought to
the attention of the Senate, some 81 of them were heard, as far as
you know, by a committee of three chosen froni this panel of nine?
Senator McCarthy. I think that can be safely assumed.
Senator McMahox. I believe you made mention of the fact that you
would give us some further information on the members of this panel?
Senator McCarthy. I said I w'ould give you further information
upon the members of the loyalty program.
Senator McMahon. Meaning these nine gentlemen ?
Senator ISIcCarthy. I do not know what information I will give on
this particular nine.
Senator McMahon. These, however, are the nine that do hear, in
the State Department-
Senator McCarthy. That is right.
Senator McMahon. And it is your contention, Senator, as I under-
stand it, that they have not done their duty in assessing these investi-
gating reports ?
Senator McCarthy. I think when they pass a woman like case No.
1, and give- her a clear bill of health without calling her down to a^k
her about any of these agencies, obviously they have not done their
duty — obviously no.
When you find a case like case No. 2, a phenomenal case, and find
a member of this panel passed this man and said he can have top-
secret clearance, then there is something radically wrong with either
their judgment or the individual.
Senator McMahon. Can you tell us — can you identify the hearing
panel in the other cases that you are going to take up ?
Senator McCarthy'. The answer is "No" ; I cannot.
Senator McMahon, That is what I wanted to know.
Senator McCarthy. Only except by rumor. When I get curious
about some of these phenomenal cases, I try to find out; and, by
hearsay, you hear that John Jones or Pete Smith, head of that par-
ticular Board — but, I cannot give you any definite information.
Senator McMahon. Have 3'ou had occasion to investigate any of
these gentlemen on this hearing board?
62 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVElSTIGATION
Senator McCarthy. I am compiling information now which I will
present to the committee on the membership of the various loyalty
boards. I frankly do not know — I do not know what information, if
any, I have on these. The information on these that I have before
me now merely consists in their activities on these various cases, and
as I say, I do not care whether it is the Governor of your State, or the
President of the United States who is on this Board, if you find that he
passes and gives a clean bill of health to some of these cases that I give
you, then you will know that there is something wrong with his
handling of the case.
Let me make this clear. I am not saying that any of these indi-
viduals on that panel are disloyal or anything like that. I just know
there is something radically wrong with the results that come from
the State Department Loyalty Board, and I am judging this solely by
the results.
Senator McMahon. You are not charging them with being disloyal,
but being incompetent and stupid. I think that is a fair statement
Senator McCarthy. I would say the Loyalty Board that passed No.
1 and No. 2 — it is putting it very generous!}' when you say they are
merely incompetent and stupid.
Senator McMahon. You say they are not disloyal, so I took the
alternative that they were dumb.
Now, Mr. Chairman, it strikes me that this would indicate a rather
quick review by the committee of these gentlemen who have been
named, and who the Senator says, and in whose opinion have passed on
these cases — obviously, who they are and what their background is,
is quite material to this investigation.
I happen to know two of them rather well, and the rest I do not
know, and I would like to get their background, because the American
people should realize as quickly as possible, not only what the pro-
cedure is that has been adopted, but the kind of men who have been
put in by the Secretary of State to operate that procedure.
This man Conrad E. Snow, I would certainly take Senator Bridges'
testimony on his behalf, which he gave to me in the Appropriations
Committee meeting the other day, as a very outstanding citizen.
Mr. Achilles, Theodore C. Achilles, is a gentleman I know quite well,
he is my next-door neighbor. He is on this panel of nine. I think it
would be very helpful if we could get this as quickly as possible.
Senator Tydings. Senator McMahon, have you any suggestion as to
how this data should be assembled? Is it your idea that we should
get a biography of each one of the men, and read it into the record ?
Is it your idea that we should bring them before us? Is it your idea
that we should proceed in some other fashion?
I agree with what you said, because the witness here, as I understand
it, has said that the investigative set-ups, on the whole, are pretty
good.
Senator McCarthy. That is my opinion.
Senator Tydings. In his opinion, he called them pretty good, he paid
them a pretty good compliment, as I recall ; he said that the trouble
was at the top, where the final decision was reached, and that obviously
would be this Board in this particular Department. So, therefore, I
think it is very pertinent that if these men had been the means of
letting people hold jobs in the State Department, who are allegedly
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 63
disloyal, the public oiiglit to know the caliber of these men, as you
suiigest.
What is 3'our thought about it?
Senator McMahon. My thought was that I would have them up
here en masse, and line them up here, one by one, and I would take
a look at them and I would examine them, each one, as to how long
he had served in the Department, whether his educational background
and competency was sufficient to sit as a judge on these matters.
I think it would be very helpful, ]SIr. Chairman. I hope we do it
just as quickly as we can.
Senator Tydings. Senator McCarthy, would that be satisfactory
to you, if we were to do that ?
Senator McCarthy. That method, Mr. Chairman, would be com-
pletely ridiculous. You can bring the men up and look at them and
find out how long they have served, and have witnesses come in who
would testify that they had been kind to their wives and families,
that they are well respected.
But, that is not the point. The only way you can determine whether
or not that Board is competent to sit, whether or not we are wasting
the money we are paying on the loyalty program, is to take the file,
let us say in case Xo. 1 first, bring the file in, and in that file you
will find^ a vast number of subversive organizations to which this
individual has belonged. Then, you should say, "Gentlemen, who
sat on that Board? Wlio was the Chairman of that Board?" And
the next thing you will want to ask them is, "Why did not you call
this individual in and have her explain these connections?"
You will say to them — and let me finish, if I may — you will say to
them, "Here is what Dean Acheson himself said, he said that anyone
connected with these organizations, even remotely, may be a bad
security risk."
You say to them, "Here are more than 28, on which you have an
FBI report. What made you think you could pass upon that case
and give a clean bill of health without even bringing the individual
in, without writing a letter on the matter? How do you explain
this?"
There is the documentation.
Then, you go to case No. 2, and say, "Here is a phenomenal indi-
vidual. '\Ylio passed on that case? Who said this man, who is one
of the top"
Wait until we get to the case, strike that part of it.
I have the cases, which I think you should take, one by one, and
bring in the Board who sat on each particular case, don't find out
whether the men are kind to their wives and families, whether the
neighbors think they are fine people, but examine them to see whether
or not they are competent for this particular job, because, you see,
all through this Government we have a vast number of individuals
who are great golf companions, great individuals, but who are doing
a very, very bad job.
This idea of bringing them up here and lining them up, and bring-
ing in their neighbors to testify that they are fine fellows and are
not disloyal is a waste of time, and is ridiculous.
Senator McMahon. I move that the committee who passed on this
matter, these nine gentlemen, be brought before this committee to
64 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
tell US what their procedures have been. We will talk with them later
on any cases that might come into question by reason of the Senator's
testimony, but I formally move that these nine members be brought
here for testimony bearing upon the procedure that they have adopted.
This is a timely point in the proceedings for that to be done.
Senator Tydings. Any comment, Senator Green?
Senator Green. No comment.
Senator Tydings. Any comment, Senator Hickenlooper ?
Senator Hickenlooper. I move to amend the motion by making a
requirement that we get the files, all of them, in case No. 1, so that we
will be able to interrogate these men who sat on the panel, in the light
of the decision on file No. 1, and the information contained in file No.
1; and in that way really be able to explore their processes of clear-
ance or nonclearance of individuals.
Senator McCarthy. Not as a witness, but as a Senator, might I
ask the committee if they will consider allowing me to sit in at that
time? I think I can be helpful to the committee, I can find out who
was chairman of the various boards, find out why the results that have
come from the Board have been so unusual. I would like to find out,
for example, when Richardson's Board considered a post audit and
said that it was bad for this, that, and the other reason, and sent it
back to them, what they have done, further, and what action they
have taken.
That is the only way you can determine whether or not that is a
competent board. Otherwise, this will just be window dressing.
Senator Hickenlooper. May I
Senator McCarthy. I do not mean to say, and I hope I am not
understood as saying that I would be the only one to delve into that
and determine those facts, but I would like to sit with you.
Senator Hickenlooper. Mr. Chairman, in order to amplify my
statement, the procedures have been well outlined, the Secretary of
State outlined the procedures and laid out the pattern of alleged pro-
cedures, I am not so concerned about the form of the procedure which
has already been laid out, and we understand that, at least I think
I do, but simply the actions taken by any board under the procedures
that have already been prescribed, and I think it is very important,
if you are going to interrogate these people, that we be in possession
of all the facts.
Senator Tydings. Senator McMahon ?
Senator McMahon. If there is any objection to the procedure
requested, I would prefei- to do it with Senator Lodge present, any-
way. I would be glad, if the Senator from Wisconsin objects to hav-
ing these men brought up, to have the request deferred until a later
time. That is quite all right with me.
It seems to me that it would be of interest both to him and to us,
to take a look at the kind of men and get the background of the men
who are accused of having done an incompetent job in this respect.
I do not press it.
Senator Tydings. If the motion is not pressed, the Chair will tell
the witness to proceed.
I think where we were, at the time we got off on this idea, was that
the Senator was about to offer in evidence the supporting material to
sustain the statements he made yesterday, as far as I can recall.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 65
Senator McCarthy. Senator, the Senator from Connecticut just
said if the Senator from Wisconsin objects to having them, having
the men brought up, so let's make it clear: I think they should be
brought up, brought before you, but in such a fashion that some
purj)ose will be served. I objected, not to their being brought up, I
think they should be brought here, I objected to the procedure you
outlined, bringing the men up and saying "We will look at them and
find out whether they are nice-looking people."
Senator Tydixgs. We will talce that up later and bring the witnesses
up at an appropriate time. I do not think we need any further ex-
planation. I think we have to get on with the evidence, or we will be
here after the next election.
I might say some of us are hopeful that that will be a prophecy.
Senator McCarthy. Where was I, Mr. Reporter?
( The record Avas read by the reporter.)
Senator McCarthy. I objected to bringing the men up and saying
that they are nice-looking people, and finding out whether
Senator Tydixgs. You have said that before.
Senator ]McCarthy. Let me finish, ]\Ir. Chairman.
Senator Tydixgs. It takes you so long, you make so many speeches
in the course of giving the testimony, the chairman does not want to
cut you off. but we have had so many speeches rather than evidence,
that we are getting along at a snail's pace.
. Senator McCarthy. I hope the Chair is not intimating that this
is being delaved bv the witness.
Senator Typings. I think the witness will have to share at least part
of the blame.
Senator Green. If the witness could learn there were two words in
the English language, "yes" and "no," he might use them more fre-
quently and it would be very helpful.
Senator McCarthy. As I started to say, so that we may know
whether or not it means anything when it is said that a certain individ-
ual "has been cleared by the loyalty board," I do think they should be
brought up at the earliest moment, but only when the files in the
specific cases are available.
Senator Tydings. That is in the record three times now.
We will ^o on with the testimony.
Senator McCarthy. With the Chair's permission, I shall proceed
in my own'f ashion, as best I can.
Senator Tydings. Go ahead.
Senator McCarthy. I believe, before the committee started the
discussion, I had said the next case which I shall present to the com-
mittee is infinitely worse than this one, but the loyalty board still
placed its stamp of approval on him.
Senator Tydings. Just a moment, please.
Did I understand that you were going to put the supporting testi-
mony in on case No. 1 before you took up case No. 2 ; and, did not you
say that would be a good thing to do ?
Senator McCarthy. I have told that to the chairman several times.
Senator Tydings. You mean, you do not have it now but you will put
it in later?
Senator McCarthy. I am putting it in, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Tydings. I thought you were on case No. 2.
Senator McCarthy. Wait a minute, will you I
66 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY IN\'E6TIGATI0N
Senator Tydings. Let me get it straight.
Senator McCarthy. I did not r
Senator Tydings. Just a minute ; are you on case No. 1 or case No. 2
now?
Senator McCarthy. I intend to put in the docmnents on case No. 1
before we touch case No. 2, and put them in on case No. 2 before we
go to case No. 3.
May I finish my statement?
Senator Tydings. Yes.
Senator McCarthy. I think this very day the President has a re-
sponsibility to call this loyalty board before him and find out why
the individual I named yesterday was declared loyal. It is his duty
to find out why this loyalty board declared her loyal — without even
questioning her — when they had a report from the FBI showing that
she belonged to considerably more than 28 Communist-front organi-
zations.
Senator Tydings. That is not testimony in this case at all, it is
nothing but an opinion of wliat the President of the United States
ought to do. Let's get on with the evidence. I am tired of having
these speeches of what the President ought to do. Let us see what
we ought to do, which is get into this evidence.
Senator McCarthy. The Chair has the right to order stricken any
testimony I give, and I am making a statement I think is important.
It is difticult, with the constant repeated interruptions and hecklii^
by the Chair
Senator Tydings. We are here to hear evidence of disloyalty of
employees in the State Dej^artment. We are not here to hear what
the President of the United States ought to do. That is something
we can debate in another place, and I would thank the witness to con-
fine himself to the matter under investigation.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman, I believe I was up to page 4,
yesterday, and, I think, to exhibit 5.
Let us now consider exhibit 5. The committee will note that on
January 18, 1935, over 15 years ago, Judge Kenyon was a sponsor of
the Political Prisoners Bail Fund Committee.
This outfit had its headquarters in room 1200, at 154 Nassau Street,
in New York.
The Political Prisoners Bail Fund Committee was a subsidiary of
the International Labor Defense, which has been cited as subversive
by the House Un-American Activities Committee, the California
Un-American Activities Committee, and the Attorney General.
This exhibit, wliich I now hand to the chairman, employing the
well-known jargon of the Communist Party
Senator Tydings. Just a moment. The matter will be inserted in
the record in full.
Senator McCarthy (continuing). Sets forth the noble purpose of a
common bail fund for those arrested in the struggle of the working
class, for the rights of oppressed minorities, in the fight against war
and fascism.
The Chairman of the Political Prisoners Bail Fund Committee was
Paul P. Crosbie, the recently deceased leader of the Communist Party
in Queens County, New York.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 67
Recently in the Federal court in New York, 11 men were convicted
of conspiracy to overthrow our Government. Among them was Ben-
jamin J. Davis, Jr. Benjamin J. Davis, Jr., was one of the trustees
of the committee under discussion.
Other ''great" Americans on this melancholy and malodorous aggre-
gation were Corliss Lamont, Carol Weiss King, and Charles Krum-
bein, who was the late treasurer &f the Communist Party of the
United States.
Again we find the lady in familiar company.
Now, if I may, I would like to discuss exhibit 6, which I now hand
to the committee.
Senator Tydings. Senator McCarthy, of course all the names will
be printed into the record, and the names are very numerous. You
always read, as I recall, a few of the names.
It would be very helpful, I am sure, to the press, if we could find
the medium of letting the press have all the names on these exhibits,
rather than just a few of them.
Senator McCarthy. I would suggest we make all of the exhibits
available to the press.
Senator Tydixgs. I will state to the press now, that it is going to
take a long while to number them and go through a list like that, if you
want to see it, because there is probably on this list two or three hun-
dred names, and I want to accommodate the press but I am a little at
odds as to how we can give you all these names, unless the time is taken
to read them. It will take quite a little while.
I think the fair way to do it would be to present the evidence, if a^ou
allow me to suggest it, I have no desire to alter your testimony, but
present the thing without comment in part of names, unless you put all
the names in so that the document may have the full comiotation before
the people of the country. *
Senator McCarthy. I thank the Chair for its suggestion. May I
say this
Senator Tydings. I hope the Senator will comply with it. I think it
is in the interest of fairness and would not detract from anything he
has to say.
Senator McCarthy. I thank the Chair for his suggestion, and it is
entirely possible the Chair might present the evidence in a different
fashion than I do, perhaps in a better fashion, I don't know. I think
it is important to show the well-known Communist names that appear
quite all the way through this case. There are individuals who — may
1 say that the purpose of a front organization
Senator Tydings. Rather than argue, proceed in your own way.
Senator McCarthy. That is what I am doing now, Mr. Chairman.
There are individuals who are fine Americans who have been in-
duced to put their names on a few of these documents, but I think
it is important to show the company these individuals have kept all
the way, and particularly the company this individual has kept all
the way through the picture.
Senator Tydings. I would like to tell the press that the date of the
last exhibit, or the next to the last exhibit — what was that ?
Senator McCarthy. It was January 8, 1935. I read it.
Senator Tydings. And the date of the present exhibit, is — New
York Times of October 9, 1944.
68 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY ESTVESTIGATION
Senator McCarthy. The Chair will note that these exhibits are
dated all the way from 1935 up to the present date.
It will be noted that exhibit 6 is a paid political advertisement
inserted in the New York Times of October U, 1944, on page 12.
Morris U. Schappes is a man who was convicted in the State court
of New York for perjury. This is the organization which was formed
to defend him, this organization .called the Schappes Defense Com-
mittee, with headquarters at 12 Astor Place. I was sponsored by
Judge Kenyon.
Senator Tydixgs. You mean she was one of the sponsors, do you
not?
Senator McCarthy. One of the sponsors.
Senator Tydings. You do not want to leave the impression that she
was the motivating influence.
Senator McCarthy. I do not know who the motivating influence
was, Senator.
Judge Kenyon was a sponsor of this organization. But lest there
be any doubt of the Communist character of this group, let me
quote from a report of the House Un-American Activities Committee,
which said on page 1555, of appendix 9 :
Morris U. Schappes admitted in sworn testimony before the Rapp-Coudert
committee that he joined the Communist Party in the summer of 1934. He
further admitted tliat he was a memher of the Communist Party's educational
commission. He told the Rapp-Condert committee that he used the name Alan
Horton in tlie Communist Party, and that under tliat alias he had delivered the
report of the educational commission at the tentli convention of the Com-
munist Party in 1938.
Schappes was on the teaching staff of the College of the City of New York
for a period of 13 years. In 1936 his superior on the college faculty refused
to recommend him for reappointment. This action led to prolonged agitation
by the Communist Party and its front organizations on behalf of Schappes.
The following organizations •participated in this agitation: The Communist
Party, the Young Communist League, the American Student Union, the League
of American Writers, the American League Against War and Fascism, and
the International Worliers Order.
In 1937 the borough president of the New York County in the city
of New York, Mr. Stanley M. Isaacs, appointed as an assistant on
his staff a reporter for the Communist Daily Worker named Simon
W. Gerson.
Almost immediately, the patriotic citizens of New York, led by
the American Legion and other equally reputable organizations,
entered a vigorous protest on the naming of an avowed Communist
to a responsible city position.
The Daily Worker wrote a letter, ranting and screaming against
this "witch-hunting campaign" and "injustice," and launched a vio-
lent and intemperate tirade against any and all who felt that the city
might better be served by a 100 percent American.
They sought the aid of fellow Communists, fellow travelers, suckers,
and just plain dopes. The latter two categories are found frequently
in the Communist manifestos, but they do not remain long.
The test of a real Red, Fascist, or fellow traveler is a constant adher-
ence to the rapidly shifting Communist Party line over a long period
of years. Here again we have this prominent State Department
official. Judge Kenyon, crying aloud in her anguish for a fellow
red, and I call anyone who gets $12,000 a year of the people's money,
very prominent.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 69
Senator Greex. May I ask a question? That $12,000 a year is a
little misleadiiiu'. Did she get $12,000 a year?
Senator ^McCarthy. Senator, the information I aave the rommit-
tee is from the Federal Ke«:ister. Tliat, I believe, shows she received
$12,000 a year. I understand the State Department said last night
that this woman was not receiving payment for the full year, that slie
only received payment for the time she worked, at the rate of $12,000
a year. I believe they announced that she only worked officially at
the job a number of weeks.
Senator Grekn. Thank you. That was the rate at which she was
paid 'i
Senator IMcCarthy. That is right. That is a fairly important per-
son, who gets paid at the rate of $12,000 a year and, I assume, expenses.
But this exhibit 7 is equally interesting in that Miss Kenyon is
named as representing the Consumers' Union.
Consumers' Union is an admittedly, out-and-out Communist-domi-
nated and owned organization. It has fronted for the party since
its inception in 1935 and is headed by Arthur Kallet, whose Com-
munist Party alias is Arthur Adams.
Mr. Chairman, I have the document but it is a bad job of photo-
stating, so I have gotten the complete page of the Daily Worker
which contains this particular document, and I wall give you both as
exhibit 7, the document and the much more readable Daily Worker
photostat.
Senator Ttdings. If the Senator will hesitate in his testimony a
moment, we can look over this.
A^liich part is it ( May I ask the Senator which part it is ?
Senator McCarthy. It starts down
Senator Tydixgs. I see, down at the bottom, is that it?
Senator McCarthy. That is right.
Senator Tydings. For the purpose of identification, these are al-
legedly, and I suppose accurately, photostats of two pages of the
Daily Worker, in which appears a news article of February 10, 1938 —
it appears to be a news article under the heading "Leading citizens
laud Isaacs' stand on Gerson," and it is continued over to page 4 of the
same paper under the heading of "47 leading citizens denounce witch
hunt on Gerson's appointment."
This is a newspaper article in the Daily Worker.
Senator McCarthy, might I ask you how much longer it would take
you to put in the exhibits you have to support the statements you
made ?
Senator McCarthy. It all depends, Mr. Chairman, on how^ much
time the committee takes in examining the exhibits. I might say, if
I am not interrupted at all, it would take about 10 minutes to put
them in.
Senator Tydixgs. I will ask the committee not to interrupt. Let
him now proceed.
I will ask the Senator if he won't try to conclude in 10 minutes. I
have a very important matter to lay before the committee, and the
Senate, immediately.
Senator McCarthy. Good — very good.
Here again we have Miss Kenyon associated with such well-known
Communists as Harry F. Ward, Louis Weinstock and Irving Potash,
who is 1 of the 11 convicted Communist conspirators.
70 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVElSTIGATIOX
One of the most notorious Communist- front orc^anizations is the
League of Women Shoppers. Two months ago, the League of Women
Shoppers merged with the Congress of American Women.
The Congress of American Women has been cited as subversive by
the Attorney General of the United States, the House Committee on
Un-American Activities and the California Committee on Un-Ameri-
can Activities. There is no question whatsoever of its Communist
domination, background, and purposes.
I submit to the committee exhibit 8 which lists the directors and
sponsors of this organization, and it will be noted that we again have
Miss Dorothy Kenyon in the company of such well-loiown pro-Com-
munists as Helen Seldes and Josephine Herbst, who was tired from
the OSS by Gen. William Donovan because of her Communist
connections.
Senator Tydings. Give the date of this exhibit. It is not on here
that I can find. If you gave it, it's all right, but I thought you might
have it.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chaiiman, I do not know whether I have
given you the elate or not.
Senator Tydings. Where does it come from ^ There is no identifica-
tion. [
Senator McCarthy. It is on the letterhead of the League of Women
Shoppers, 70 Fifth Avenue, New York, and it contains a list of direc-
tors and sponsors. That is what this is, Mr. Chairman.
Senator TydinCxS. All right.
Senator McCarthy. The message in this particular document has
been blacked out.
Senator Tydings. Go ahead.
Senator Green. May I ask about that ?
Senator McCarthy. I won't be able to conclude in 10 minutes, if
you interrupt.
Senator Green. I notice the date is blacked out. Have you the
original ?
Senator McCarthy. I have not.
Senator Green. You have not ?
Senator McCarthy. I have not.
Senator Green. Can you get it so that you can insert the date ?
Senator McCarthy. If I cannot, I am sure the staff can get a letter-
head from the League of Women Shoppers.
Senator Green. That is not the job of the Committee
Senator McCarthy. JSIay I proceed to try to finish, Mr. Chairman,
in the requested 10 minutes'?
As an indication of the far-reaching power and influence of this
Communist-front organization, the committee might be concerned to
know that Mrs. Dean Acheson, the wife of the Secretarj^ of State, is
listed on page 1023 of appendix 9 of the records of the House Com-
mittee on Un-American Activities as a sponsor of its Washington
branch. There is no length to which these purveyors of treason will
not go to bring into their fold the names of unsuspecting and mis-
guided men and women wlio are intluenced by a glib stoiy of social or
economic improvement and thus lend prestige to a sordid and dissolute
cause.
Mrs. Acheson appears once on tlie roster of these subversive organi-
zations and Miss Kenyon more than a scoi'e of times.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 71
Mr. Chairman, this indicates that it is easy to get some fine indi-
vidual's name connected with isolated Communist-front organiza-
tions, but that circumstance is not the same when yon find the same
names through a group of 28.
I have now given the committee a partial report on the activities of
this ofticial of the State Department. We find Judge Kenyon as
s]")onsor of the American Committee for Anti-Nazi Litertaure in
March 19o9 on exhibit 9. Governmental agencies liave cited this
organization as a Communist front.
Exhibit 9, and let me make it clear that when I cite Mrs. Acheson,
I do that to show how successfid they have been in their attempts to
get tine people on their lists.
Senator Ttdixgs. You said that before.
Senator INIcCarthy. Again in January' of 194:0 we find Miss Kenyon
as a signer of a petition under the auspices of the American Com-
mittee for Democracy and Intellectual Freedom, an organization cited
as subversive by the House Committee on Un-American Activities
and the California Committee on Un-American Activities. I hand
you exhibit 10 .
Senator Green. Have you the date of that previous exhibit?
Senator McCarthy. I said in January of 1940.
Senator Green. The date they were declared subversive?
Senator McCarthy. Yes, we have complete dates compiled by the
House Un-American Activities Committee. I will be glad to give that
to the committee.
I might say that the date they were declared subversive, in my opin-
ion, is not significant where we are dealing with a person who belongs
to 25 or 30 of them.
Senator Tydings. But. you will put them in the record?
Senator McCarthy. Yes, I will put them in the record.
1 think that is significant, when we find the same people connected
with them, and that information will be available, I will state that
to you, Mr. Chairman, later on.
Senator Tydings. Thank 3^ou.
Senator McCarthy. Exhibit 11 again shows Judge Kenyon on the
Advisory Committee of the Citizens Committee to Aid Striking Sea-
men, which has been cited as subversive by Government agencies.
Exhibit 12 again shows Miss Kenyon as a member of the advisory
board of Film Audiences for Democracy, an organization which has
been cited as subversive by governmental agencies.
Exhibit 13 lists the officers and advisory board of Films for Demo-
cracy, an organization cited as subversive by the governmental agen-
cies. Again we have Dorothy Kenyon as a member of the advisory
board.
The next exhibit 14, shows Miss Kenyon as a sponsor of the Greater
New York Emergency Conference on Inalienable Rights, an organi-
zation cited as subversive by governmental agencies.
I will hand the entire list to the Chair.
Senator Tydings. What is this list a ])art of, this 13 ?
Senator McCarthy. May I hand the Chair the entire list so he
can follow me.
Senator TvniNos. So that we won't get the papers mixed.
Senator McCarthy. I was referring to exhibit 1 [ now.
68970—50 — pt. 1 6
72 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
Senator Tydings. Would it be agreeable to you to put the testimony
that you are about to read in conclusion
Senator McCarthy, Just one paragraph and I will be through.
In the New York Times of Tuesday, January 31, 1939, appeared
an advertisement under the auspices of the Washington Committee
to Lift the Spanish Embargo. The committee will note that this
exhibit 15 names Miss Dorothy Kenyon as an "eminent American"
who ardently supported the Communist cause in Spain.
Exhibit 16 shows Miss Kenyon as a sponsor of the Lawyers Commit-
tee on American Relations with Spain, another organization listed
as subversive by govermnental agencies.
I could continue to give this type of evidence for some time, but it
appears to me that the pro-Communist background of this official of
the State Department has been abundantly and conclusively estab-
lished.
Exhibt 17 which lists Miss Kenyon as a member of the advisory
board of the Milk Consumers Protective Committee is merely another
Communist front, cited by a governmental agency as subversive.
I suggest to the committee in concluding my remarks on Miss Ken-
yon, that by the findings of the Attorney General of the United States
and other responsible governmental agencies, she does not conform
by any stretch of the imagination to the yardstick of loyalty set forth
by Secretary of State Acheson.
Senator Tydings. Thank you. Senator McCarthy; and, I would
like to read the committee now a telegram that I have just received,
and ask the committee's advice on what we should do about it :
I will welcome an opportunity to appear before the committee at its earliest
convenience to attack Senator McCarthy's outrai;eous and maliciously false
charges against me. Judge Kenyon.
What does the committee desire to do about this ?
Senator Green, I think the committee should meet in executive
■session.
Senator Tydings. Without objection, the hearing will be recessed,
subject to the call of the Chair.
This may be tomorrow morning, it may be Monday. I camiot tell
you accurately, but will let you know later today.
Please clear tlie room promptly as some of the Senators have en-
gagements, and I am anxious to dispose of this matter.
(Whereupon, at 12 : 50 p. m., the subcommittee stood in recess, sub-
ject to call of the Chair.)
STATE DZPARTMEiNT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY
INVESTIGATION
MONDAY, MARCH 13, 1950
United States Senate,
committp^e on foreign rei^vnons,
Subcommittee Appointed Under Senate Resolution 231,
Washington., D. G .
The subcoinittee met, pursuant to adjournment on March 9, 1950,
at 10:oO a. m. in room 318, Senate Office Building, Senator Millard
E. Tydings, chairman of the subcommittee, presiding.
Present: Senators Tydings, Green, McMahon, Hickenlooper, and
Lodge.
Also present : Senators Connally (chairman of the full committee) ,
and McCarthy.
Senator Tydings. The committee will come to order.
The witness will proceed with his testimony.
TESTIMONY OF HON. JOSEPH R. McCARTHY, UNITED STATES
SENATOR FROM WISCONSIN— Resumed
Senator McCarthy. ]Mr. Chairman, I brought along with me a book
put out by the Committee on Un-American Activities. This contains
the listing which the Chair asked for the other day.
Senator Tydings. Good.
Senator McCarthy. It indicates the date the various fro^it organi-
zations have been declared subversive, or fronts.
Now, I cannot give this to the chairman, but I will loan it to him.
1 will need it every night when I prepare for the next day.
Senator Tydings. Let us look at it for a moment.
Senator McCarthy. You may use it during the day.
Senator Tydings. Go right ahead, Senator.
Senator McCarthy. I might say, in giving that to the Chair, that
I do not think that the indication that certain front organizations have
been declared subversive is important insofar as some of the more in-
telligent people belonging to them are concerned. I think it is more
important wlien we speak of the naive people, or the dupes who may
be fooled.
The next case is that of one Haldore Hanson.
Senator Tydings, Will you s})eli that, please?
Senator McCarthy. II-a-1-d-o-r-e H-a-n-s-o-n.
I will have a copy of this for the press in about 3 minutes, and for
the members of the committee.
Senator Tydings. Go right ahead.
73
74 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVElSTIGATION
Senator McCarthy. This man, Mr. Chairman, occnpies one of the
most strategically important offices in the entire State Department.
The indications are that he joined the Department of State in Febru-
ary 1942, and is recognized in the Department as a specialist and ex-
pert on Chinese affairs.
Hanson, now executive director of the Secretariat of the Inter-
Departmental Committee on Scientific and Cultural Cooperation, will
head up a technical cooperation projects staff of the new point 4 pro-
gram for aid to underdeveloped areas, which will have charge of the
expenditures of hundreds of millions of dollars of our taxpayers'
money over all the world.
For the source of this, Mr. Chairman, this is from the as-yet-unpub-
lished Department of State departmental announcement 41, dated
February 21, 1950; and, if the Chair will just wait, I will be using
this myself later, and I will hand it to him.
Senator Tydings. All right.
Senator McCarthy. The pro-Communist proclivities of Mr. Hanson
go back to September 1938, that is, insofar as I have records of them.
Hanson was a contributor to Pacific Affairs, the official publication
of the Institute of Pacific Relations, whose staff was headed by mil-
lionaire Frederick Vanderbilt Field, an admitted Communist. Inci-
dentally, the Institute of Pacific Relations was listed as a Communist-
front organization by the California Committee on Un-American
Activities, and the date will be shown in the book I have handed to
the Chair.
However, I do not think these dates are important, insofar as this
man is concerned. This is not a dupe. Here is one of the cleverest,
one of the smoothest men we have in the State Department.
This man Field has devoted his entire fortune to the Communist
cause.
It is important to keep in mind that Mr. Hanson also wrote for the
magazine Amerasia, of which Philip Jacob Jaffe was managing editor.
Jaffe was arrested, indicted, and found guilty of having been in
illegal possession of several hundred secret documents from the State,
Navy, War, and other Government department files.
Mr. Chairman, I now have before me a document entitled "Depart-
ment of State Departmental Announcement 41." I believe I have
already given the date as February 21, 1950. The heading is "Estab-
lishment of the Interim Office for Technical Cooperation and Develop-
ment." Then, in parenthesis, by way of explanation of this rather
high-sounding name, we find "Point 4 Program."
The first paragraph of the order reads as follows :
One. Effective immediately tliere is established under the direction of the
Assistant Secretary for Economic Affairs of the Interim Office for Technical
Cooperation and Development (TCD).
The initials of that will be "TCD" according to this announcement.
Turning over to page 4, Mr. Chairman, we have listed as the Chief
of this technical cooperations project staff, this man Haldore Hanson.
His phone extension is 3011, and 5012, in the State Department.
Paragraph 2 on page 1 sets forth the following responsibilities of
Mr. Hanson's division. I will read this. I think it is important to
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 75
the committee, as you hear the balance of the evidence in regard to
this man :
Tlie Interim Office is assigned srenei-al resjionsibility within tlie Department
for («) seciirins effective administration of proiirams involving? teclmical assist-
ance to economically nudeveloped areas and (h) directing the planning in prep-
aration for tlie technical cooperation and economic development (point 4) pro-
gram. In carrying out its responsibilities the Interim Office will rely upon the
regional bureaus. Bureau of Ignited Nations Affairs, and other components of
Economic Atfairs area for participation in the technical assistance programs as
specified l>elow, and upon the central administrative offices of the administrative
area for the [lerformance of service functions.
Mr. Chairman, before this is handed out to the press, I would like
to ask that the entire document be considered as accepted in evidence.
Senator Tydings. Mark it as an exhibit, Senator.
This is a new case, and you might give the initials of the subject
of it, and then put after it, a letter in sequence, so we can have them
in order.
In this case it will be "18."
Senator McCarthy. Very good, sir ; and also "19," the departmental
announcement No. 41.
Senator Tydings. All right.
Senator ]McCartiiy. I will hand that to you in just a moment.
Senator Tydings. Keep it as long as you want it, but when you have
finished it, pass it to us, so we can see it.
Senator McCarthy. Thank you very much.
From this it would appear that his division will have a tremendous
amount of power and control over the hundreds of millions or billions
of dollars which the President proposed to spend under his point 4
program, or what he has referred to as the "bold new plan."
Hanson's appointment is not made by the President, but by the
State Department, and is not subject to any Senate confirmation.
Therefore, it would seem rather important to examine the background
and philosophy of this young man.
The State Department Biographical Eegister gives what would, on
its face, seem to be a chronological story of an increasingly successful
young man. It shows, for example, that he graduated from college
in 1934 at the age of 22 ; that he was a teacher in Chinese colleges from
1934 to 1937; and then a press correspondent in China from 1936 to
1939; a staff writer from 1938 to 1942; then in 1942, he got a job in
the State Department at $4,600 a year ; that in 1944, he was listed as a
specialist in Chinese affairs at $5,600 — and I ask the committee to keep
in mind that this young man got his listing as a specialist in Chinese
affairs in 1944; that in 1945 he was made executive assistant to the
Assistant Secretary of State at $6,500; that in May of 1948 he was
made Assistant Chief of the Area Division No. 3; that on June 28,
1948, he was made Acting Chief for the Far Eastern Area, Public
Affairs Overseas Program Staff' — another date I ask the committee to
keep in mind ; and that on November 14, 1948, he was made executive
director of the Secretariat of the Interdepartmental Committee on
Scientific and Cultural Relations. There is certainly nothing unusual
about this biography. Nothing is there to indicate that this man
might be dangerous in the State Department as Chief for the Far
Eastern Area Public Affairs, Overseas Program Staff, during a time
M'hen the Communists were taking over China.
76 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY IXVElSTIGATION
However, much is left out of this biograpli}'. It does not show, for
example, that this young man was rumiing a Communist magazine
in Peiping when the Japanese-Chinese war broke out.
May I repeat, it does not show that this young man was running
the Communist magazine in Peiping when the Japanese-Chinese war
broke out. It does not show, for example, that he spent several years
with the Communist armies in China, writing stories and taking pic-
tures which the Chinese Communists helped him smuggle out of the
country. I will show later where the Chinese generals did the
smuggling for him. Nor does this biography show that this man,
after his return from China, wrote a book — a book which sets forth
his pro-Communist answer to the problems of Asia as clearly as Hit-
ler's Mein Kampf set forth his solutions for the problems of Europe.
Nothing that he has said or done since would indicate that he re-
pudiates a single line of that book.
Incidentally, in connection with that, I would like to point out that
this is not a secret to the State Department. As early as 1947, Con-
gressman Busbey read some ver\' brief excerpts from that book on
the House floor. That was called to Mr. Hanson's attention at that
time and he did not repudiate any statement I vShall read to you from
that book.
This man clearly believes that the Communists in China stand for
everything that is great and good. His is not the picture of a mer-
cenary trying to sell his country out for 30 pieces of silver. In read-
ing his book, you are impressed with the fact that he firmly believes
the Communist leaders in China are great and good men, and that
all of Asia Avould benefit by being communized.
In other words, we are not dealing here, Mr. Chairman, with the
usual cheap Communist who is selling out for a price. Here is a man
who, apparently from his book, is completely sincere that communism
is the answer.
Take, for example, what lie has to say about Mao Tse-tung, the
head of the Communist Party at that time, and noAv the Communist
ruler of China, and Chu Teh, commander in. chief of the Eighth
Route Communist Army, and according to Life magazine of January
23, 1950, No. 2 man in prestige to Mao Tse-tung.
In chapter 23, entitled "Political Utopia on Mt. Wut'Ai," in de-
scribing a meeting with an American Major Carlson, here is what
he had to say :
We stayed up till midnight exchanging notes on gueiTilla armies, the farm
unions, and the progress of the war. I was particularly interested in the Com-
munist leaders whom Carlson had just visited and whom I was about to meet.
Mao Tse-tung, the head of the Communist Party, Carlson characterized as "the
most selfless man I ever met, a social dreamer, a genius living 50 years ahead
of his time." And Chu Teh, commander in chief of the Eighth Route Army,
was the "prince of generals," — listen to this, if you will — "a man with the
humility of Lincoln, the tenacity of Grant, and the kindliness of Robert E. L'^e."
As we go on in the book, we find that after Mr. Hanson spent
some time with these generals, his hero worship was even greater.
Mr. Chairman, for a man slated as Cliief of the Buit au which may
have the job of spending hundreds of millions of dollais throughout
the world, this indicates, to say the least, a disturbing amount of hero
worship for the No. 1 and No. 2 Communist leaders in the Far East
today.
STATE depart:ment employee loyalty investigation 77
Listen to this. These are Hanson's own words, and no one else's.
Here is what Hanson says on page 349 of his book. He condemns the
right-wing groups in the Chinese Government for "fighting against
the democratic revohition as proposed by Mao Tze-tmig and the
Comnnuiists."
Senator Ttdings. Senator McCarthy, are these his own words, or
are they quoted from somebody else ?
Senator McCarthy. The quotes are from his own book. Every-
thing in liere, I will make clear, is from his own book.
I would like the Chair's permission to present the entire book and
have that made a part of the record. I know that there is some
expense involved in having this printed, but I think, in view of the
fact that this man will be dealing with hundreds of millions or billions
of dollars, the several hundred dollars it would cost to have that book
reprinted, would be worth while. That is especially important in view
of the fact that all of the books have mysteriously disappeared. I had
to borrow the publisher's copy of the book in order to get the exact
quotes.
I assure you I have taken these directly fi-om the book and not from
anyone else's version of it.
Senator Ttdixgs. You offer it as an exhibit ; we will take it and
examine it. I understand it is a lengthy book
Senator McCarthy. It is rather lengthy. I would say about 500
pages; but it is extremely important to read the entire book, because
I have gone through, hit or miss, and picked out what I thought were
some of the sequence of quotes which very clearlj'" express this man's
attitude toward communism.
Senator McMahon. Mr. Chairman
The Chairman. Senator McMahon.
Senator McjMahon. I don't Avish to interrupt, but I think we have
to point out that this quote that the Senator talked about is quoting
this INIajor Carlson, whoever he may be.
Senator INIcCartht. Let me make it clear, so that there will be no
mistake. The first quote, as I say, is from chapter 23, and here is
what Carlson said ; then I said later on we will show a hero worship
even greater.
Then, the next is on page 349 : "He," meaning Hanson, "condemns
the right-wing groups in the Chinese Government for 'fighting against
the democratic revolution as proposed by Mao Tze-tung, and the
Communists'." And we leave Carlson in chapter 23, and there is no
other quote that will be a quote of Carlson.
Senator McMahon. But it was Carlson that described them or him
as "the most selfless man I ever met, a social dreamer."
Senator McCarthy. I have made that very clear. If the Senator
will read that, that is very, very clear.
Senator Tydixos. In order to conclude this, the witness said that the
first quote he made was the statement by INIajor Carlson, and then
he went on to quote, on page 349, the statement of the writer himself ;
is that correct ?
Senator McCarthy. Let me read this, so that there can be no ques-
tion that there was any attempt by way of a misquotation.
78 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
In chapter 23, entitled "Political Utopia on Mount Wut'Ai", in
describing a meeting with an American, Major Carlson, here is what
he had to say :
We stayed up till midnight excliaugiug notes on guerrilla armies, the farm
unions, and the progress of the war. I was particularly interested in the Com-
munist leaders whom Carlson had just visited and whom I was about to meet.
Mao Tze-tuug, the head of the Communist Party, Carlson characterized as "the
most selfless man I ever met, a social dreamer, a genius living 50 years ahead
of his time." And Chu Teh — •
still quoting from Hanson, says —
And Chu Teh, commander in chief of the Eighth Route Army, was "the prince
of generals, a man with the humility of Lincoln, the tenacity of Grant, and the
kindliness of Robert E. Lee."
Senator Tydings. All right, pause there.
Senator McCarthy. Yes.
Senator Tydings. What you have just read in quotes is what Major
Carlson told the man who wrote the book, so the press will get it clear ;
is that correct ?
Senator McCarthy. The press has a copy, and it is very, very
clear.
Senator Tydings. That is all right, then.
Senator McCarthy. I am sure it is clear enough.
I might say, I certainly appreciate very much the opportunity to
proceed and develop these facts today, the way the chair has been
doing.
Senator Tydings. All right, go ahead.
Senator McCarthy. Let me make it clear
Senator Tydings. If we do interrupt, it will be only for purposes of
identification.
Senator McCarthy. I understand that, and I certainly have no ob-
jection to clarifying questions, and I hope the committee does ask them
if necessary — ask such questions as they see fit.
Now, Mr. Chairman, this quote on page 349 of the book is very
clear as to what this young man feels. There is nothing coy about that
statement. That statement has not been retracted, either.
On the same page he points out that anti-Red officials within the
Government were making indirect attacks upon the Communists and
that, quoting from the book, Hanson's own words, "leaders of the
Communist Youth Corps were arrested by military ofJEicers at Hankow,
I myself was the victim of one of these incidents and found that
local officials were the instigators."
Just listen to this. He says, "I myself was the victim of one of
these incidents and found that local officials were the investigators.""
In other words, here is this man Hanson, in his own book, on the
same page, page 349, who says that the anti-Red officials were making
attacks on the Communists, and I quote him when he says "leaders of
the Communist Youth Cor])s were arrested by military officers at
Hankow." And he says, "I myself was the victim of one of these
incidents and found that local officials were the investigators."
So, this young man has a criminal record in China where he was
arrested, not by the Communists, but by the anti-Communists.
From Hanson's book it appears, i-ight in the next paragraph, that
the Nationalist Government knew of his close collaboration with the
Communist Army, For example, on page 350, we find that his pass-
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 79
port was seized by tlie police in Sian avIumi they found that he was
travelin*^ from Communist fruerrilla territory to the Communist head-
quarters. He states tliat the man resi)()nsible "for this illegal action
was (lov. Chino; Ting-wen, one of the most rabid anti-Red officials
in China." The Governor's purpose, says Hanson, was merely to
suppress neATS about the Communists.
That should be in quotes: '■'The Governor's purpose was merely to
suppress news about tlie Comnuuiists."
Before quoting further from this book written by Mr. Hanson, it
might be well to give a clearer picture of the job which Secretary Ache-
son has picked out for him. The State Department document lists
some of the duties of his bureau as follows :
A. Developing over-all policies for the program.
B. Formulating general program plans and issuing planning
directives.
C. Coordinating specific program plans developed by the regional
bureaus, working under him, and making necessary adjustments.
D. Approving projects, determining action agencies, and allocating
funds for United States bilateral programs.
E. Directing negotiations and relationships with intergovern-
mental agencies and with other United States agencies participating
in the coordinated program or otherwise carrying on technical-assist-
ance activities.
Initiating and developing plans for technical-assistance programs
for individual countries within their respective regions,
i, B. Reviewing program proposals affecting their regions which
originate from any other source.
C. Negotiating and communicating Avith foreign governments.
D. Directing State Department personnel assigned abroad to co-
ordinate and give administrative and program support to bilateral
programs.
I might say there, ]\Ir. Chairman, section D. which I have just read,
"Directing State Department personnel assigned abroad to coordinate
and give administrative and program support to bilateral program" —
as I develop the facts which I think the committee Avill consider im-
portant enough to proceed further on, you Avill find that most of these
men with the same type of background, his unusual background; at-
tempt to grt in positions where they are directing the assignment of
personnel. If they can direct the proper personnel in the proper place,
it gives them complete control, of course, of the program.
E. Continuously evaluating programs and projects within regions.
F. Proposing program changes.
This is all work to be done by the unit to which Hanson has been
assigned as chief.
G. Initiating instructions to the field carrying out their respon-
sibilities and reviewing all other instructions concerned with tech-
nical-assistance programs.
This gives you some idea of the tremendous poAvers of the agency
in which Mr. Hanson is the Chief.
Let us go back to Hanson's writings — and incidentally, I direct
your attention to Mr. Leslie A. Wheeler, Avhose telephone extension is
3871; Technical Cooperative Policy Staff Chief will be Samuel P.
Hayes, Jr., telephone extension 4571 and 4572; Technical Coopera-
tion Management Staff is Richard R. Brown, extension 2155.
80 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
Now, let US go back to Hanson's writings :
All through the book he shows that not only did he have complete
confidence in the Communist leaders but that they also had complete
confidence in him. On page 256 he refers to how Communist Generals
Nie and Lu Chen-tsao acted as his couriers, smuggling packets of
films and news stories for him, with the aid of Communist guerrilla
spies, into Peiping.
In this connection I might say that he very frankly points out that
the Communists do not tolerate anyone who is not completely on their
side. This is what Hanson himself said — they do not tolerate anyone
who is not completely on their side.
Hanson makes it very clear all through the book that he is not
only on the Communist side but that he has the attitude of a hero-
worshiper for the Chinese Communist leaders.
His respect and liking for the Communist leaders permeates almost
every chapter of the book. For example, on page 284 and page 285,
he tells about how some ragged waifs whom he had gathered into his
sleeping quarters regardecl Mao Tse-tung and Chu Teh as "gods."
That is his language. He then goes on to tell about their favorite
Communist general, Holung, and states that they convinced him that
Holung was a very extraordinary man whom they described as "big
as a Shantungese, heavy as a restaurant cook, but quick as a cat in
battle." He then goes on to describe on page 285 how, when he
himself met General Holung, he found him to be much as the hero-
worshiping boys had described him. "He is," said Hanson, ''a living
picture of Rhett Butler from the pages of Gone With the Wind."
This praise of Chinese Communist leaders goes on, page after page.
On page 278, he describes Communist General P'eng as the most rigid
disciplinarian and "the most persistent student of world aifairs."
In chapter 26, he speaks with apparent bated breath of the Brain
Trust of Communist leaders wdio were immortalized by Edgar Snow
in his Red Star Over China.
That part should be in quotes — "Communist leaders who were im-
mortalized by Edgar Snow in his Rod Star Over China."
Senator Htckenlooper. Mr. Chairman, is it Show, as on my copy,
or should that be Snow ?
Senator INIcCarthy. Sorry. The typewriters in my office sometimes
make mistakes; that is "Snow."
On page 295, in referring to two other Communist generals, he says :
Should this book ever fall into Communist hands, I must record that those two
lonely men made excellent company during my 3 weeks in Yenan.
In reference to the Communist university at Yenan, if you care to
make that correction on page 9, after referring to the Communist uni-
versity in Yenan, after describing in complimentary manner this uni-
versity and the students, on page 296 he says :
Every cadet divides his time between political and military subjects. On the
one hand he listens to lectures on Marxian philosophy, tlie history of the Chinese
Revolution, the technique of leading a mass movement; on the other hand he
studies guerrilla tactics, the use of military maps, and the organization of a
military labor corps.
On page 297 he points out that no tuition is charged at the academy
and that each student is supplied with uniform, books, and food, plus
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 81
a pocket allowance, and then has this to say — and this should be rather
]iuinorous, except that it is a bit tragic :
Some recent visitors to Yenan have spread a report that the academies are
supported by Russian rubles — a thin piece of gossip.
Says Mr. Hanson :
I was told by several Chinese leaders, including Mao Tse-Tung, that the larg-
est coutributions came fi'oui American sympathizers in New York.
On pages 297 and 298, Hanson relates that in talking to one of the
Nationalist warlords, and I will call your attention to this again — in
talking to one of the Nationalist warlords :
I suggested that he could learn a good deal from the Communists about dis-
cipline and integrity of leadership).
On page 303, Hanson has this to say :
My attitude toward Communist China's leaders was a mixture of respect for
their personal integrity and a resentment of their suspiciousness. They im-
pressed me as a group of hardheaded, straight-shooting realists.
Now, that is Hanson's description of Communist China's leaders:
They impressed me as a group of hardheaded, straight-shooting realists.
After an interview with Mao Tse-tung, he states :
I left with the feeling that he was the least pretentious man in Yenan and
the most admired. He is a completely selfless man.
Now, here is a man who is not quoting anyone else except himself.
Following is Hanson's description of how the Reds took over. I
quote from page 102 :
Whenever a village was occupied for the first time, the Reds arrested the land-
lords and tax collectors, held a public tribunal, executed a few and intimidated
the others, then redistributed the land as fairly as possible.
In chapter 28, in comparing the Communists to Chiang Kai-shek's
troops, Hanson had this to say :
I left Yenan with only one conviction about the Communists : that they were
were fighting against the Japanese more vlioleheartedly than any other group
in China.
Pie then goes on to condemn, using his language, "Red-baiting" offi-
• 1 • /->,i '^ 1 • 5 fe to to 3 to
cials m Chungking.
On page. 312 of his book, Hanson quotes a Communist editor as
stating as follows :
Our relationships to the U. S. S. R. —
<and Hanson is now quoting this editor —
is no different than that of the American Communist Party. We respect the
work of Russia's leaders and profit by their experience wherever we can, but
the problems of China are not the same as those of Russia. We plan our program
from a Chinese point of view.
Hanson then adds :
The explanation seemed logical enough to me.
In connection with Hanson's position as Chief of the Technical
Cooperation Projects staff, in charge of Truman's point-4 program,
the following on pages 312 and 313 of his book would seem especially
significant. He quotes Mao Tse-tung as follows :
China cannot reconstruct its industry and commerce without the aid of British
and American capital.
82 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVElSTIGATIOlSr
Can there be much doubt as to whether the Communist or the anti-
Communist forces in Asia will receive aid under the point 4 program
with Hanson in charge ?
Gentlemen, here is a man with a mission — a mission to communize
the world — a man whose energy and intelligence, coupled with a
burning all-consuming mission, has raised him by his own bootstraps
from a penniless operator of a Communist magazine in Peiping in the
middle thirities, to one of the architects of our foreign policy in the
State Department today — a man who, according to State Department
announcement No. 41 will be largely in charge of the spending of
hundreds of millions of dollars in such areas of the world and for
such purposes aS he himself decides.
Gentlemen, if Secretary Acheson gets away with his plan to put
this man, to great extent, in charge of the proposed point 4 program,
it will, in my opionion, lend tremendous impetus to the tempo at which
communism is engulfing the world.
On page 32 of his book, Hanson justifies "The Chinese Communists
chopping off the heads of landlords — all of which is true," because of
"hungry farmers." That the farmers are still hungry after the land-
lords' heads have been removed apparently never occurred to him.
On page 31 he explained that it took him some time to appreciate
the "appalling problems which the Chinese Communists were attempt-
ing to solve."
In chapter 4 of Hanson's book, he presents the stock Communists'
arguments for the so-called Stalin-Hitler pact of 1939.
Secretary Acheson is now putting Hanson in the position to help
the Communists solve the appalling problems in other areas of the
world with hundreds of millions or billions of American dollars.
The obvious area, Mr. Chairman, in which this man will start using
American money to help the Communists solve the people's problem
will be Indochina and India.
It should be pointed out that this case was brought to the attention
of State Department officials as long ago as May 14, 1947. At that time,
the Honorable Fred Busbey, on the floor of the House, discussed this
man's affinity for the Communist cause in China, and while he did
not discuss in detail the quotes from the book, Mr. Busbey did call the
State Department's attention to the fact that he had written this
book, and that was before he got the promotions which made him, for
example, Acting Chief for the Far Eastern Area, Public Affairs, et
cetera.
So much for Hanson.
Senator Tydings. Senator, is there any way the committee could get
another copy of this book to whicli you referred?
Senator McCarthy. The committee can get a copy, I r.m sure, from
the publishers.
Senator Tydings. Will you leave the name of the publisher, and
his address, at your convenience ?
Senator McCarthy. I am sure I can borrow another copy long
enough to have it reproduced, or for the committee's perusal. There
may be a copy available over in the Library of Congress, I am not
sure.
Senator McMahon. Wliat was the date of publication ?
Senator McCarthy. After he came back from China, so I assume
that would be in 1939, Senator.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 83
Senator IMcMaiion. It was published in 1939?
Senator INIcCarthy. Yes, in 1939 ; but keep in mind Hitler's Mein
Kanipf was published 10 years before he started putting each and
every j^aragraph into action.
Senator Tvuings. All writings you refer to, I take it for granted,
were in the book published in 1939 ?
Senator McCarthy. Yes, except when I referred to Amerasia, and
the Institute of Pacific Relations — it is all in the document.
Senator Hickenlooper. Do you have the book with you, Senator?
Senator McCarthy. No, I have not.
Senator Hickenlooper. I am sure the book will show when it was
published.
Senator McCarthy. I am snre it was published in 1939.
Senator McMahon. Do you know the name of it. Senator?
Senator McCarthy. I gave you the name.
Senator McMahon. Did you ? I did not think you did.
Senator Tydings. Conld you refresh yonr mind and give us the
name of the book, in ease it is not in here? I thought you gave it.
Senator McCarthy. I think it is in here. If it is not, I will have
the name for you in just a minute.
Senator JNIcMahon. It is not in here, Senator.
Senator McCarthy. It may not be in there. Without searching
for that, I have sent for it so the Chair will have it later.
Senator Tydings. You will furnish that?
Senator McCarthy. I am sure I can at least borrow a copy for the
Chair.
The next case, Mr. Chairman
Senator Tydings. Senator, pardon me just a moment.
I will ask one of the advisers of the Foreign Relations Committee
if he will not try to get that book out of the Library before somebody
else gets to it ; in the event there are not many copies of it the com-
mittee will, want to have it.
Senator McCarthy. If you will call my office, they will give you
the name of it. I am sorry it is not in the document.
Senator Tydings. That must be attended to quickly or the book
will be gone.
Senator McCarthy. I do not think that the copy will remain there
very long, .if there is a copy in the Library.
I might say, Mr. Chairman, that this is my own filing system
Senator Tydings. Take your time.
Senator McCarthy. And, perhaps not the best one.
The name of the book is Human Endeavor, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Tydings. The name of the book is Human Endeavor,
by Haldore Hanson, published about 1939, apparently.
Senator McCarthy. Sorry I have to hold the committee up this
way.
Mr. Chairman, I would like next to take up the case of an indi-
vidual who was assistant to Alger Hiss at the San Francisco Con-
ference.
Senator Tydings. Let us have the copy.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chaiiuian, I would like to introduce this
document, these documents, rather, and they will be marked 20, 21,
aud 22, and ask that they be received in evidence.
Senator Tydings. Call them, as you put them in.
84 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVElSTIGATION
Mr. Clerk, are you getting tliem, because we are going to leave you
with the responsibility of having all these exhibits. Do not lose
them. If any exhibits are lost
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman, if any are lost by the reporter,
I am sure I can supply the copies.
This is not in my printed document, the fact that this woman, Esther
Caukin Brunaiier, in the State Department, was the first assistant to
Alger Hiss in the San Francisco Conference. This is set forth in her
biographical sketch issued by the State Department.
I might say that the case of this woman's husband is extremely
important, important not to this committee because of his case, be-
cause he is not in the State Department, and there are facts about
that case which I cannot discuss in public, but I would like to give the
Chair a memorandum on that when he starts his investigation,
because the present status of the husband will shed lots more light
on this case.
Senator Tydings. Senator McCarthy, how you shall give us the
information is entirely up to you. We will take what you want to
give us in the open, and what you think we ought to have in executive
session, we will receive there.
Use your own judgment, because obviously we do not know what
the evidence is.
Senator McCarthy. I shouhl like now to take up the case of Esther
Caukin Brunauer, Assistant Director of Policy Liaison. UNESCO
Relations Staff, Department of State, at a salary of $9,70G a year
according to the current Federal Eegister. I urgently request that
this connnittee give serious consideration to the details of this case
and act immediately to ascertain the facts.
I think this is one case, Mr. Chairman, upon Avhich you should take
immediate action and the information I will su]3p]y the Chair today,
in memorandum form, I believe will convince him of the necessity of
immediate action. .
Senator Tydings. Let me make sure I understand you. You are
recommending that this be one of the first cases we investigate?
Senator McCarthy. I think this definitely should be the very first
case.
Senator Tydings. All right.
Senator McCarthy. Mrs. Brunauer was instrumental in commit-
ting this organization to the support of various front enterprises,
particularly in the so-called consumer field. One such instance of
this activity was reported in the New York Times of April 27, 194?).
In the case the American Association of University Women joined
with Consumers Union, the League of Women Shoppers, and other
completely communist-controlled fronts.
I might say here, again, you do not have a woman who is a dupe.
You have an intelligent woman who makes an excellent appearance
and excellent impression. She is not mistaken about these organi-
zations. I know there are some joiners who may make the mistake
of joining two or three of these Commie organizations before they
have been declared so, who may do it without knoAving what they
are doing. But not this individual, who is an intelligenjt person.
Senator Tydings. Have you any idea what her age is, Senator, now,,
approximately ?
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 85
Senator McCarthy. I frankly haven't. I have never even seen
the individnal. I believe, maybe, some of the ladies do not give their
ages in their biographical sketches.
Exhibit 21 inclicates that Mrs. Brunaner presided at a Washington
meeting of the American Friends of tlie Soviet Union. This again
was some time ago. This starts back 15 years ago.
Senator Tydings. The date of it seems to be Jnnc 11. 1936.
Senator McCarthy. This organization has been cited as subversive
by the Attorney General of the United States, the House Committee
on Un-American Activities, and the California Committee on Un-
American Activities. The princi]ial s]:)eaker at this meeting was Myra
Page, long an avowed leader of the Communist Party and frequent
writer for the Daily Worker and other Communist periodicals, so
there can be little doubt about the subversiveness of that organization.
Certainly this committee has no doubts as to the domination by the
Communist Party of the American Youth Congress. It has been cited
as subversive by the xYttorney General and other governmental
agencies.
Senator Tydings. Are you referring now to the Senate cases,
Senator ?
Senator McCarthy. Yes, Mr. Chairman.
This, Mr. Chairman, is case Xo. 57 in the Congressional Hecord.
Senator Tydings. I take it you mean that case N^o. 47 as given by
you on the Senate floor about February 20, I think it was, is the case
of Esther Caukin Brunauer.
Senator jMcCarthy. That is correct.
Senator Tydings. Do you want to make any reference to your first
case in the Congressional Eecord, or leave that out?
Senator McCarthy. Yes. I do. Mr. Chairman. I am looking for
that.
Here is what I said on the Senate floor, Mr. Chairman. This is
what will be found in her file, along with other information :
This individual was employed in March 1944 as Division assistant in the
Division of Internal Security. The House Un-American Activities Committee
advised on August 8, 1947, that an admitted former Communist Party member
was formerly associated with this individual in Communist activitiesin Wash-
ington. D. C. This individual's husband admitted having been a member of
the Communist Party. The husband now has a highly confidential position with
the Navy Department. The file indicates that this individual has been associated
with a group of known Communists —
and I can assure the Chair the file does show that, to the best of my
knowledge anyway.
Keep in mind. ]\Ir. President, that she was given a job in the Division
of Internal Security.
A report dated July 16. 1947. states that in 1941 a Senate investigating com-
mittee had found that both this individual and her husband were members of
the Communist Party. A report dated Sept(>mber 1.5, 1947, by a Government
investigative agency, advised that a reliMble informant reported this individual
as a Communist and thnt she luis been recently contacting a member of a Soviet
espionage ring. This individual is still in a highly paid job in the State
Department.
That is from the Congressional Record, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Tydings. Senator, before you leave the first case will you,
either now or later, if it has any connotation with your remarks on the
Senate floor, identify it ? If it does not it is not necessary.
86 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
Senator McCarthy. The first case was not mentioned on the Senate
floor, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Tydings. That accounts for that.
Senator McCarthy. The principal speaker at this meeting, re-
ferring to the meeting that this lady sponsored, was Myra Page, long
an avowed leader of the Communist Party and frequent writer for
the Daily Worker and other Communist periodicals.
Certainly this committee has no doubts as to the domination by
the Communist Party of the American Youth Congress. It has been
cited as subversive by the Attorney General and other governmental
agencies.
Exhibit 22 shows Esther Caukin Brunauer was a signer of the
call to the annual meeting of the American Youth Congress in 1938.
Senator Tydings. I don't want to divert the witness, but I think
the press may not have a copy of this.
Senator Lodge. Neither has the committee.
Senator Tydings. It reads "We the Undersigned" and is broken
down under the headings of women's organizations, health, education,
trade-union, social service, government, and religious groups. There
again I see some of our former colleagues : Arthur Capper, United
States Senator from Kansas ; L. D. Dickenson, Governor of Michigan ;
Matthew A. Dunn, United States Representative from Pennsylvania;
James A. Farley, United States Postmaster General ; Thomas F. Ford,
United States Representative from California ; Frank W. Fries, United
States Representative from Illinois, and several other Representatives
and a number of governors and a number of United States Senators.
I won't take the time to read them.
Senator McCarthy. I might say, Mr. Chairman, that I have re-
frained from naming the known Communists up here on all of these.
Each document I present from day to day you will find contains some
lespectable citizens who have been duped into joining.
I might say this also in this case, Mr. Chairman. I do not think
the fact that this woman belonged to these Communist front organi-
zations can at all compare with the information the Chair will find in
her files and in the files of her husband. I g've these documents to
show that those over in the State Department who hired her and kept
her on should have been put on notice, at least, that there was something
wrong in the record; and also, I believe, when the Chair sees her
record he will not be able to believe that she is still in a highly paid
position having top secret clearance today.
This is, in my opinion, one of the most fantastic cases I know of.
Senator Tydings. I will not look at my records, of course, until the
whole committee sees them at the same time. I just want to make
that plain.
Senator McCarthy. I understand that.
I might say also, I am not trying to advise the committee, but in
all sincerity I don't think the members of the committee will be any
more competent than I would be to go over and examine those records
personally. I think you will have to have on your staff individuals
who have been in this type of work for some years, who have taken
some ]3art in compiling those records, so that you will be able to get
everything out of it.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 87
May I suggest this further, especially. Especially in this Brunauer
case 1 urge that the committee get not only her loyalty file, her per-
sonnel file
Senator Tydings. Both in the State Department?
Senator jMcCarthy. Both in the State Department.
Senator Tydings. Give me that again.
Senator McCarthy. The State Department loyalty file, the State
Department personnel file, and both files, which Avill be combined as
one, over in the Civil Service Commission, and then what is doubly
important, a glance at the FBI file on this woman and her husband,
'iliey are living together; at least I assume they are, which makes his
file important also.
Exhibit 2-2 shows Esther Caukin Brunauer was a signer of the call
to the annual meeting of the American Youth Congress in 1938.
Esther Brunauer is the wife of Stephen Brunauer, a Hungarian by
birth. He is a scientist who has had the rank of Commander in the
United States Xavy and his scientific work has involved some of the
topmost defense secrets which the armed forces of this country possess.
I think it is hightly important that this committee immediately, in
accordance with the mandate from the Senate, obtain the files of the
Federal Bureau of Investigation, Naval Intelligence, and the State
Department on the activities of Stephen Brunauer, the husband of
this ranking official of the State Department.
I ask that the committee immediately seek to learn whether or not
Stephen Brunauer has :
1. Been the subject of a constant investigation by Government
agencies over a period of 10 years.
2. A close friend and collaborator of Noel Field, known Communist
who recently and mysteriously disappeared behind the iron curtain.
o. He has admitted to associates that he was a member of the Com-
munist Party.
I am reluctant to go any further into this case but I am prepared to
produce competent witnesses who will testify to the importance of
immediate action in this matter.
It can be readily shown that at least three Government agencies
have been sifting the activities of a small group of people whose work
seriously threatens the security of the comitry.
Certainly 'the Connnunist front activities of Mrs. Brunauer are
sufficient to seriously question her security status.
Let me make it clear that I think the investigative agencies of the
Government have been doing an excellent job. The thing that dis-
turbs me is, after they have done a job, after you have matters in
the files that make it unbelievable that a person could get top secret
clearance, there is just no regard whatsoever paid to those reports
of the investigative agencies.
So much for Brunauer.
Mr. Chairman, the next case will take about, or, I would say a
least an hour and a half to complete. It is 20 of 12. Housing legis-
lation is on tlie Senate floor, and I will want to be on the floor this
afternoon. If the Chair wants nie to, I shall start this document. I
very much hate to get a third of the way through a case and then quit.
If tlie Chair does not liave any objection, instead of taking lo minutes
on this and getting in the middle of this, I would prefer starting on
it tomorrow.
68970— ao—pt. 1 7
88 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
Senator Tydings. Senator, of course we will try to acconnnodate
3-0U, but as I told you, we would try to sit all day and give you a chance
without any major interruptions at presentinir your case, and I noti-
fied the committee to that extent, and we are prepared to be here.
I would suggest, if you would allow me, that we start and keep on
going, and keep in touch with the floor situation. It may be that some-
body is reading AVashington's Farewell Address or some other im-
portant document, in wliich event we can keep on without the loss
of time. So, if you will start, we will keep in touch with the floor,
and I will notify the Clerk, and at the proper time I will notify you
if the housing matter is up for serious discussion.
Senator McCarthy. Let me suggest, then, Mr. Chairman, I don't
want to be cut off in the middle of this. I would rather miss some of
the housing discussion than be forced to stop in the middle of it.
Could we do this : It will take me, I assume, about an hour and a
half to finish tliis. It Avill be 1 o'clock or maybe slightly after that.
Could Ave agree to this, to notify tlie floor that I will have no objection
to the committee sitting until 1 o'clock, and I will have to object to the
committee continuing after that time, because housing legislation is
up. It is sometliing I have been working on for some time, and I
must be there.
Can we have an agreement that we will not stop in the middle of
this case, and let me finish it, and when I finish this case we can retire
to the Senate floor.
Senator Lodge. And pick up again his afternoon ?
Senator McCarthy. No. I will have to be on the floor during the
housing legislation.
Senator Tydings. Senator, there are a couple of aspects of this
thing that make it a little difficult, much as I would like to comply
with any request of yours.
The first one is that, as you knoAv, we have asked Miss Kenyon to
be here tomorrow, and she may not be ready to go on the stand. I
don't know. I sent her a telegram telling her that her request to be
heard would be honored promptly, and we had ]^lanned to hear her
on Tuesday at 10 : oO a. m. I got a reply by wire from her to the
effect that she would be here Tuesday at 10 : 30 a. m.
Now, so far as I know, she will be here tomorrow morning. In the
event, however, she should ask the committee for another day, I think
we would have to probably take counsel and extend her the time that
she requires to make her answer.
But if we could go on today and finish your case, it was my idea
that we would immediately, notwithstanding we had not concluded
the open hearings, organize our staff and take up these matters that
you have suggested here and in other places, and start to outline a
case.
I am trying to get, as you have yourself thought wise and I thought
wise too, experienced investigators, preferably FBI men who are
available, so that there will be no question about having an experi-
enced handling of these particular files. I haven't gotten those men
3'et, but I am working on it and want to submit it to the whole com-
mittee before it becomes official. But if we could conclude with you
today, I will sit here until 10 or 11 o'clock tonight so that we can
dispose of it and get the thing moving in high gear and if there is
anybody down there that is disloyal, we want to know it just as you do.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 89
Senator McCarthy. I iiiijrht say, ]Mr. Chairman, that I want to
cooperate with the Chair fully, but simply must be ovei- on the floor
when we are discussino- housing. That is a matter I have been working
on for '2 years.
Senator Tydincs. Lefs go to 1 o'clock, and talk it over then.
Senator McCarthy. I can't very well talk it over then, because I
have to notify the floor whether or not they should put in an objec-
tion to mv having the conunittee sit. The Chair knows we can sit
onlv bv uiianimous consent. If we can agree that we will finish this
case and then adjourn, I will notify the floor not to object to having
this conunittee sit.
Senator McMahon, I want the Senator to object.
Senator Tydings. Let me say this, before you do that.
Senator ^ifiCartliy:,-! want to accouunodate you as hmg as I can. Is
the reason you would like to go over that you have not your other
cases ready, or is it because of the housing legislation ^
Senator McCarthy. I have plenty of material here to take up some
time, Mr. Chairman, but as I have told you, I will give the committee
the forenoon, and an hour or so in the afternoon. I will do that as
long as necessary, but when there is legislation up which I think is
important, the Eeorganization Act provides that when such a sit-
uation occurs, a Senator is entitled to be on the floor.
Here is my thought : I don't want to be caught in the middle of
a case. I would like to present all of the evidence, because it is done
in chronological order. I would like to have an agreement either
that I can finish this case when 1 start, or that we adjourn now and
start again tomorrow morning. I do think instead of starting at
10 : 30 it might be better to start at 9 in the morning.
Senator Tydixgs. Senator, it has been suggested by my colleagues to
my right that if you can find it convenient to take up this case and
without any interruption pursue it to a conclusion, perhaps at: that
time, and without penalizing you or taking any advantage of that
agreement, we could again discuss it and work out something that
would be mutually satisfactory to you and the committee. How does
that strike you ?
Senator Hickexlooper. Well, Mr. Chairman, if you are referring
to the whispered tentative conversation which I had with you a
moment ago, which I did not feel was a final commitment one way or
the other and had not expected to be announced publicly
Senator Tydixgs, I beg your pardon. I thought it was your sug-
gestion. I merely relay eel it.
Senator Hickexlooper. I made a suggestion of that kind, but did
not exi)ect it to be published. What I suggested was that the Senator
certainly is entitled to continue a presentation of this case until he has
concluded. I said to the chairman that to my knowledge, and I think
to the knowledge of everybody else, the Senator from Wisconsin has
been vitally interested in housing for over 2 years. I had not realized
his interest until lie mentioned it just a moment ago, but I can under-
stand why he is interested in being on the floor when housing is
discussed.
Senator McCarthy. Let me say also for the Senator's benefit that
the Housing Act of 1948 was drafted by the Senator from Wisconsin ;
the only public housing measure that was passed in 1948 was drafted
b}' the Senator from AVisconsin, so this is one of the subjects I have
90 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
been working at, and I simply insist that I be there. I am not asking
iiny favor from the committee in that at alh
Senator Hickexlooper. I further suggested, if we continue our pri-
vate conversation here in public, that upon the completion of this case
by the Senator, if Judge Kenyon appears and wants to go on tomorrow
at 10: 30, so long as she has been invited to come, and if that is con-
venient, that I saM' no particular reason why she should not come on at
10 : 30 o'clock tomorrow morning and not disturb her convenience, and
the Senator from Wisconsin can go on following her testimony. I am
ho])ing to expedite this matter.
Senator Tydings, Suppose the Housing Act goes on all this week.
You will feel the same way so long as that act is pending, won't you?
Senator McCarthy. I will feel that I want to be on the Senate floor
in the afternoon. I will give you all the time you want in the forenoon.
Senator Tydixgs. Go ahead with your case and we will work it out.
We won't take advantage of you if you want to get on the floor. The
Chair will vote with any group that sees that you have your chance to
be on the floor while legislation in which you are interested is up.
I regret we have to postpone this, I will say to everybody, and I know
you do, but there is no other way we can handle it, so if you will go
ahead with this case, when we get to the end of it we will recess subject
to the situation that will then be mutuallv agreeable.
Senator McCarthy. I want to make sure that we have the under-
standing, as Senator MclNIahon just made the statement he is going
to insist that I object on the floor. It is now understood that I can
start the next case and complete it, and that we then adjourn the
liearing until tomorrow or whenever you want to.
Senator Tydings. What is your pleasure, gentlemen?
Senator McMahon. I reserve my vote until we see what the situa-
tion is on the floor. I am informed that some amendment to the
FDIC may be up, and not the housing bill, for debate.
Senator Tydings. If the FDIC comes up instead of the housing bill,
of course our understanding would be to continue on here.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman, in about 10 minutes I have to
decide whether or not I shall have to personally make sure that I will
he available on the floor. If the Senator from Connecticut does not
want to agree that when this case is finished I can go over to the Senate
floor and work on this matter, I shall have to call the floor and say,
"Put in my objection," which will prevent the committee sitting after
12. Otherwise I would just as soon give the committee another hour
and a half's time on this case.
Senator Tydings. Let me see if I can sunnnarize it in a way that we
'Can all agree on. Senator, you want to be present if the housing bills
are up. That is a must on your part, and everything will have to be
shaped to that end.
Now, in the event the housing bill is not up, would you object, then,
to sitting with the permission of the Senate, here, until the housing-
bill does come up ?
Senator McCarthy'. It all depends, Mr. Chairman, on what legisla-
tion comes up.
Let me make myself clear. I am willing to give the committee the
forenoon. I do have other work to do, you see. I have my own con-
stituents to take care of, and legislation in which I am interested. I
have been informed that the housing bill will be up. I think that
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 91
caine direct from your majority leader's office. If we can have an agree-
ment by the entire committee that we can adjourn after this case has
been completed,' then I shall not object to the committee sitting.
Otherwise, if the Senator from Connecticut is going to take the arbi-
trary position tliat when I have lost that right, he is going to insist
on sitting, I shall have no choice but to call the floor now and say I
object to this conunittee sitting. I don't want to do that.
Senator Ttdixgs. Unless the Chair is overruled, he will announce
that if the Senator from Wisconsin desires to take up this case to con-
clusion, and if the housing bill is up on the floor at any time we are
sitting, the committee will recess at the notice of that event until
tomorrow morning at 10 : 30 o'clock.
Senator McCarthy. That is not sufficient, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Tydings. You phrase it. Senator.
Senator McCarthy. That when I have completed this case, if the
Senate is in session that we then adjourn until tomorrow morning at
such time as the Chair desires. I don't care whether it is 10, or 9 : 30.
Senator Tydings. Regardless of what is up on the floor?
Senator McCarthy. Yes. I don't want to get into a squabble at
1:30.
Senator Tydings. We will proceed in that fashion, unless the Chair
is overruled.
Senator Green. You are not canceling the appointment we made
witli Miss Kenyon ?
Senator Tydings. Oh, no. Miss Kenyon will be here tomorrow
morning at 10 : 30.
Senator McCarthy. I don't want to interfere with Miss Kenyon
at all.
Senator Tydings. Proceed with the next case.
Senator McCarthy. I would like to introduce three more docu-
ments in the last case: exhibit 23, which is a photostat of the New
York Times dated Thursday, March 16, 193i>, which reflects that
Esther Caukin Brunaner was very active in launching an organiza-
tion called The American Union for Concerted Peace Efforts.
This is. to point out that tlie American Union for Concerted Peace
Efforts was cited as a Communist-front organization, the leader of
which was the editor of the Daily Worker. It is to be noted from this
newspaper article that Esther Brunaner served on the executive com-
mittee of the American Union for Concerted Peace Efforts.
Exhibit 21, which is another photostat of the New York Times, of
December 3, 1938, a photostat whicli pertains to the activities of
Brunaner in connection with the Committee for Concerted Peace
Efforts.
I referred in my statement to the Congress of Youth, also, Mr. Chair-
man. I did not introduce any exhibit at that time. I am now produc-
ing that, and that will be exhibit 25.
Now, Mr. Chairman, I ask that there be accepted iu evidence exhibits
26, 27, 28. 29, and 30 and 31.
Senator Tydings. The exhibits will be filed immediately following
the case of the subjects to wliom tliey are applicable.
Senator McCarthy. And tliey are received in evidence. I assume.
Mr. Chairman, the State Department, with great frequency, utilizes
the services of a large group of individuals in diverse "^fields as
"consultants."
92 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
One of its regiilar performers in this field is the man I wish to
discnss next. He is Owen J. Lattimore.
Lattimore was not only a consnltant. bnt one of the principal archi-
tects of onr far eastern policy. This man is one of the State De-
partment's ontstancling experts on problems dealing with the Far East
and has been for a nnmber of years.
Lattmiore is currently employed as a director of the Walter Hines
Page School of International Relations, located at Johns Hopkins
University in Baltimore, Md, He has held numerous positions with
the State Department, among them a 6-month period in 1941 as the
political adviser of President Roosevelt to Generalissimo Chiang
Kai-shek, He was a Dejnity Director in charge of the Pacific Branch
of the Office of War Information and in June of 1944 he, with John
Carter Vincent, later to head the Far Eastern Bureau of the State
Department, accompanied Henry AVallace on a diplomatic tour of
Siberia and Free China.
Recently Lattimore completed a State Department mission to India
and it is understood that he is now a consultant in the Department.
I call your attention to this. Mr. Chairman, that while the State De-
partment will tell you that he is not on the payroll as of today, the
point is he is still considered by the Department as one of its top ad-
visers and is put on and off the payroll as consultant apparently at
W'ill, and is apparently one of the top men in developing our Asiatic
program.
As I say, I know when this case is published the State Department
wnll come out and nay. "This man is not on our payroll."' Let me
make it clear that so far as I know he has free access to the Depart-
ment. I think the Chair will find upon investigation that he has a
desk which is kept there for him constantly, kept for his sole benefit,
imd he comes in at will.
Senator Hickexlooper. Is it your lUKlerstanding, Senator Mc-
Carthy, that Mr. Lattimore is on what might be termed the panel of
consultants who are called in from time to time on a per diem basis,
for a day or two or for a week or so, or for some short period of
time, and after their consultation is over they retire back into private
life until they are again called to consult on matters of their specialty?
Senator McCarthy. Even much closer than that. Senator. He is
the very close personal friend and adviser of those in charge of the
Far Eastern Branch, and I might say that in this connection I will
be glad to give the committee the names of witnesses whom they may
decide to interrogate, either in public or in executive session.
Senator Hickexlooper. Thank you.
Senator McCarthy. This man's record as a pro-Communist goes
back many years.
I hand the committee a letter, dated December 19, 1940. That is ex-
hil)it 27, exhibit 26 being this statement itself. Again we have the
familiar name of Frederick V. Field, Communist chairman of the
editorial board. Equally familiar is the name of Philip J. Jatfe,
managing editor of the magazine, who was indicted and convicted for
having illegal possession of secret State Department documents. The
connnittee will note that there follows a list of eight members of the
board of this pro-Connnunist magazine. It will also observe that 50
percent of the editorial board of this magazine, wdiose editor was con-
victed of possessing State Department secret documents illegally,
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 93
have been or are iio-sv highly placed officials of the Department of State
of the United States.
Tlieir names are: T. A. Bisson, Owen Lattimore, David H. Popper,
and William T. Stone.
In the June 6, 1946, issue of the Washinoton Times-Herald there
api)ears an article entitled "How Come?" written by Mr. Frank C.
"\Val(h()i>, editorial directoi- of that newspaper, whicli will be exhibit
28.
Shortly, I shall read that article into the record, but I should like
to mention in passing that of the 57 instructors in the orientation con-
ference and training programs for personnel of the Foreign Service
and the Department of State, all but three were Government officials.
Those three were Dr. Edward C. Acheson, director of the School of
Foreign Service and brother of the present Secretary of State; Prof.
Owen Lattimore of Johns Hopkins University, and Prof. Frederick L.
Schuman, of Williams College, Williamstown, Mass.
But more of this gentleman later.
When Mr. Waldrop asked ''How come?" he was getting closer to a
sordid picture than he imagined.
Here is what he had to say :
Herewith an item that may ])e of interest to Secretary of State Jimmy Byrnes
who is doing liis level best these days to cope with J. Stalin's bucking broncos of
the Kremlin.
Whether he finds it interesting or not, he certainly could with profit ask a
few questions about a project in his own shop going by the title of the "Orienta-
tion Conference and Training Programs for Personnel of the Foreign Office and
the Department of State."
The writer of this piece sat in, uninvited, yesterday on one of those training
projects and found it nothing more or less than an example to diplomats on
how to needle a man whose back is turned — in this case Gen. Douglas MacArthur.
I might say to the committee that while I am going back a number
of yeais, I think you must go back a number of years to develop the
complete picture. [Continues reading :]
To begin at the beginning, the State Department has a Division of Training
Services which has the very valuable assignment of making better diplomats of
the departmental forces.
As a part of this, there are scheduled for every workday from Monday through
Friday all this month, a series of lectures by supposed experts on subjects of
importance in diplomacy.
Don't give u.p. It concerns you too, because the State Department is sup-
posed to look out for the interests of the United States between wars and you
live here.
Of ~)7 instructors listed to give the developing diplomats the real dope on their
business, all but three are Government officials.
The tbree exceptions are: Dr. Edward C. Acheson, director of the School of
Foreign Service at the George Washington University here and brother of Under
Secretary of State Dean Acheson : Prof. Owen Lattimore, of .lohns Hopkins
University, Baltimore; and Prof. Frederick L. Schuman, of Williams College,
Williamstown, Mass.
Lattimore is a bosom pal of Henry Wallace, th«; great mind of the ages now
trying to decide whether he can best save the world by staying on in Truman's
Cabinet to bore from within or by resigning to bore from without.
Lattimore also hangs out with other i>ersons less well known, to an extent
that ought to give .1. Byrnes some pause.
.Tust an item: He was formerly on the editorial board of Amerasia. the pro-
Soviet magazine that got caught in possession of confidential State Department
documents in 1944 with the result that an editor and a State Department em-
ployee were convicted and fined.
Lattimore also has described Stalin's blood purges of 1936-39 as a "triumph
for democracy," and that, friends, is just a slight sample.
He's clever, but you invariably find him in all those old familiar places when
you check up. Consider his performance of yesterday.
94 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
Most people have the impression that on the record and the evidence the wel-
fare of the United States is better looked after in Japan with Gen. Douglas
MacArthnr in sole command than in Germany, where a four-cornered quarrel
over the remains grows worse and worse.
To all of this, Dr. Lattimore yesterday issued an hoiir-long "na-a-a-a-ah, it's
lousy." His line is that the Japs have outsmarted IMacArthur in that they are
holding onto a "conservative" agricultural policy and occasionally rescue one
of their industrialists, bankers, and so forth, from the hangman's rope.
Match that up, citizens, with what you've been hearing from Moscow, if you
both'er to listen. And match up with it the realization that such a thought is
the best offered our State Department help as expert inside dope on the Far
East.
How come the State Department has to drag in Owen Lattimore to tell what's
what in the Orient? Hasn't the Department got anybody on its own staff
who knows anything?
And as for the baby lined up for June 19 — that F. L. Schuman — ^he's all too
well known around here, especially to people who have read the record of the
Dies committee.
But if you don't already know what he is, you can get him completely in a
fla.sh by turning to page 582 of his latest book, Soviet Politics at Hmue and
Abroad, wherein he states "The Russian adventure marks a long forward stride
toward human mastery of man's fate * * *."
This again, Mr. Chairman, is referring to a man who is called in
to lecture our diplomats. He says in his book :
The Russian adventure marks a long forward stride toward human mastery
of man's fate. * * *
That is how the State Department's expert instructor on United States Soviet
relations sums up Stalin's behavior and the almost 28 bloody years of Commu-
nist dictatorship in Russia.
No wonder State Department secret documents leak. No wonder Jimmy
Byrnes goes to conferences with Molotov and comes staggering home asking
who touched off the blast.
This writer plans to sit in on Schuman's June 19 performance, if it comes off,
and will try to report on same in this space. That is, of course, if they don't
lock the door first.
Thus we have the officials of the State Department again warned
of a man who by any "yardstick of loyalty*' could not possibly be a
good security risk.
Mr. Lattimore himself is a prolific writer and there is no lack of
material for the committee to ascertain exactly where this man stands
in the political scheme of things.
The Reverend James F. Kearney, S. J., writing in the Colinnbia
magazine of September 1949, gives more first-hand information of
great value to the committee. This magazine is published by the
Knights of Columbus, the most prominent order of Catholic laymen
in America.
Here is what Reverend Kearney wrote :
Who or what has so vitiated the opinion of intelligent Americans on the China
question?
This article was in September, 1949 :
Until recently, despite the dust that has been deliberately thrown in American
eyes by pink correspondents, the question could be stated so clearly and simply
that granuuar school students could grasp it. Having explained it to grammar
school students, I know. Here it is, expressed in monosyllabic words : "If the
Reds win out tliere, we lose. If they lose, we win." Well, for all practical pur-
poses, the Reds have now won, and in consequence we and the Chinese have lost.
For communism it is the greatest triumph since the Russian revolution ; for us,
though few Americans yet fully realize it, it is perhaps the greatest disaster in
our history; and the end is not yet. Who is responsible? It wasn't a one-man
job ; short-sighted Chinese officials contributed 50 percent. There are those who
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 95
believe, though, that no Americans deserve more credit for tliis Russian triumph
and Sino-American disaster than Owen Lattiniore and a small group of his
followers.
Owen Lattiniore, contid.-int of two United States Pre.sidents, adviser to our
State Department, author of 10 books about the Far P^ast, where he has 25 years
of travel and study to his credit, was born in Washington, D. C, but after a few
months was taken to North China. At 12 he went to study in Switzerhmd, then
In Eiiirhmd, and returned to China as a newsman before taking up exploration,
particularly in Manchuria and Mongolia. He then studied in Peipinii', first on
a I'eUowship from the Harvartl Yenching Foundation and later on a John Simon
GuggenJieim Memorial Foundation fellowship, knows the Chinese, Mongolian,
and Russian languages well.
Returning to the United States at the outbreak of the Sino-Japanese war in
I'JoT. a year later he became directm' of the Walter Hines Page School of Inter-
national" Relations of .Johns Hopkins Univer.sity, a post he still holds.
Iiicidentall}', he has held that post, I believe, all through the time
he has acted as State Department consultant.
In 1941 he was for 6 months President Roosevelt's political adviser to Gen-
eralissimo Chiang Kai-shek, then returned to the States to enter the OWI, be-
coming deputy director to the overseas branch in charge of Pacific operations.
In June, 1!>44. he and J. Carter Vinent, later to head the Far Eastern Bureau of
the State Department, accompanied Henry Wallace of the State Department on
a diplomatic tour of Siberia and free China.
So high does Owen Lattimore stand in Washington that it is said the only
two books on President Truman's desk when he announced Japan's surrender
were newsman John Gunther's Inside Asia and Lattimore's Solution in Asia.
Lattimore was next named special economic adviser to Edwin V. Pauley, head
of the postwar economic mission to Tokyo. Though not an authority on Japan,
he did not he.sitate to criticize former Ambassador Jo.seph C. Grew's plan,
adopted by MacArthur, to govern the Japanese people through the Emperor.
He believed that the Emperor and all his male heirs should be interned in China
and a republic set up in Japan.
In this thoroughly distinguished orientalist's career there are many disturbing
features. For example, in fornier Red Louis Budenz' March 19, 1949, Collier's
article, entitled "The Menace of Red China," we read "Most Americans, during
World War II fell for the Moscow line that the Chinese Communists were not
really Communists, but agrarian reformers. Tliat is just what Moscow wanted
Americans to believe. Even many naive Government officials fell for it. This
deception of United States officials and public was the result of a planned cam-
paign ; I helped to plan it. The No. 1 end was a Chinese coalition government in
which Chiang would accept the agrarian reformers, at the insistence of the
United States. We could work through legitimate Far East organizations and
writers that were recognized as 'Oriental authorities.' Frederick V. Field em-
phasized use of the Institute of Pacific Relations. The agrarian reformers idea
started from there. It took root in leading Far East cultural groups in the
United Statt^s, spread to certain policymaking circles in the State Department
and broke into prominent position in the American press. The Communists
were successful in impressing their views on the United States State Department
simply by planting articles with the proper slant in such magazines as Far
Eastern Survey, Pacific Affairs and Amerasia. Both Far Eastern Survey and
Pacific Affairs "are publications of the Institute of Pacific Relations. This is not
a Communist organization."
I might say for the benefit of Father Kearney that the Califoriiia
Committee on Un-American Activities cited the Institute of Pacific
Relations as a Communist front organization.
Senator Tydixgs. You have been just quoting for the record Mr.
Budenz' article in Collier's magazine?
Senator McCarthy. That is correct.
Where does Mr. Lattimore come in? From 1934 to 1941 he was editor of
Pacific Affairs. Freda Utley mentions him in two of her books. In her Last
Chance in Cliina she tells how ^Moscow, where .she then worked as a Communist,
was able to help its friends and discomfit its enemies in the Far East thanks
to the Institute of Pacific Relations, and that Mr. Lattimore was among those
Americans who came to Moscow for help and advice (p. 193).
96 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
I may inject here, if I may, that while I have not been in touch
with Freda Utley, I believe that she would be one of the valuable wit-
nesses on whom the committee could call. She is a former Communist,
apparently has completely reformed, and is apparently a very in-
telligent woman.
Senator Tydings. Is she the Polisli lady who went in there and
came back and became an American citizen ?
Senator McCarthy. I don't know her national background.
Senator Tydings. I have them mixed up, I suppose.
Senator McCarthy (continues reading) :
In her Lost Illusion (p. 194) she refers to the same 1936 Moscow meeting:
"The whole staff of our Pacitic Ocean cabinet had an all-day session at the
institute with E. C. Carter, Owen Lattimore, and Harriet Moore, leading lights of
the Institute of Pacific Relations."
Understand, I am now quoting from a person who apparently sat
in tight with the Communists at that time.
"I was a little surprised at the time that these Americans should defer so
often and so completely to the Russian viewpoint. Owen Lattimore found it
difficult at first to submit to the discipline required of the Friends of the Soviet
Union. He told me a few months later in Londcm how he had almost lost his
I>osition as editor of Pacific Affairs because he had published an article by the
Trotskyist Harold Isaacs. In later years in the United States it did not astonish
me to "find the Institute of Pacific Relations following the same general lines
as the Daily Worker in regard to China and .Japan."
Henry Wallace never claimed to be an expert on the Far East. How much,
if any, of his report after returning from the Siberia-China visit was written or
suggested by the oriental expert, I\Ir. Lattimore, I do not know. One thing
emerges, however : After their return, the American policy which has proved so
disastrous for both Chinese and American interests and so helpful to Russia was
put into effect and is still being pursued. Lattimore's solution in Asia was
described by one reviewer as "an ai)peal to Chiang Kai-shek to free himself from
the galling yoke (of the Kuomintaiig) and to set free the democratic forces
which have proved effective in northwestern China,' for example, the Chinese
Reds. That book is again referred to in an article by ex-Conununist Max East-
man and J. B. Powell in a June, 1945, Reader's Digest article, The Fate of the
World Is at Stake in China, wherein they blast the deception that Russia is a
democracy and that the Chinese can therefore safely be left to Russian influence.
Owen Lattimore is perhaps the most subtle evangelist of this erroneous con-
ception.
Mr. Lattimore praised the net result of the Moscow trials and the blood purge
))y which Stalin secured his dictatorship in 19nr>-,'?I) as a triumph for democracy.
He now urges our Government, in Solution in Asia, to accept cheerfully the
spread of the Soviet form of democracy in Central Asia. His publishers thus
indicate the drift of his book: "He (Mr. Lattimore) shows that all the Asiatic
peoples are more interested in actual democratic practices, such as the ones
they can see in action across the Russian border, than they are in the fine theories
of Anglo-Saxon democracies which come coupled with ruthless imperialism."
Does that sound as if Mr. Lattimore, a top advi.ser on our Far Eastern affairs, is
on our team?
The same article continues with a prophecy which has just about come true:
"If Russian dictatorship spreads its tentacles across China the cause of democ-
racy (for example. United States style) in Asia is lost. As is well known, these
tentacles need not include invading Soviet troops, but only the native Commu-
nist Parties now giving allegiance to the Soviet Union and taking their direc-
tives from Moscow. When these Couuuunist Parties get control of a neighbor-
ing state the Moscow dictatorship and its fellow travelers call that a friendly
government. It is by means of these Conununist-controlled friendly govern-
ments — not by Soviet military conquest — that Russian power and totalitarian
tyranny is spreading from the Soviet Union, in Asia as in Europe."
That* is perhaps good background for the current slogan of Mr. Lattimore and
his loyal followers, Edgar Snow, Ted White, Richard Lauterbach, Harvard's
Fairbank, and many an ex-OWI man, that there's nothing much for America to
worry about because Mao Tse-tung's communism is a nationalist movement.
STATE DEPAKTMEAT e:MPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 97
A moment's reflection should make it clear that the very last thing a real
riiinese nationalist would do would he to swallow hook, line, and sinker the
doctrine of Karl Marx, a (lerman Jew, who besides lieing a foreigner lias la
system that .uoes coiuiter to every Cliinese instinct and evei-y tradition in the
Chinese concept of society.
This recalls an incident a Belgian prie>st related to me in Shanghai a year and
a half ago. He had become a Chinese citizen, and when the Chinese Reds occu-
]tled his church in North Cliina they followed the usual custom (which is proba-
bly new to Mr. Lattimore) of putting up the pictures of Marx and Stalin in tlie
place of honor above the high altar, with those of Mao Tse-tung and Chu Teh
lielow. A Chinese Red then told the priest flatly, "We are going to get rid of
absolutely all foreign influence in Cliina. Our policy is China for the Chinese."
I can imagine I\Ir. Lattimore saying. "Just what I told you." But the Belgian-
Chinese replied, "And those two foreign gentlemen up there. ;\Iarx and Stalin?
When did they become Chinese citizens?"' The Red slunk silently away.
If anyone is still puzzled by the contention that the Chinese Marxists are
primarily nationalists, a glance at the Communist manifesto will clear matters
up. Though not in substance, yet in form, we read there : "The struggle of the
proletariat with the bourgeoisie is at first a national struggle. The proletariat
of each country must, of course, first of all settle matters with its own bour-
geoisie." That. I believe, .shows us wdiat is back of the present national slogan
our United States pinks apply to China's Reds. It's not authentic nationalism,
of course, as the manifesto explains later : "The Communists are reproached with
desiring to abolish countries and nationality. The working men have no country.
We cannot take from them what they have not got."
The spurious nature of the nationalism of Mao Tse-tung was admitted by
Mr. Lattimore himself, perhaps unintentionally, in a tape-recorded speech he
gave in San Francisco, December 7. 1948: "The Chinese Communists never
made any bones about the fact that they are Marxists. They are Marxist Com-
munists in their international relations. They never qtiestion the Russian line.
They follow every twist and tui-n of it." That is an important admission by
Mr. Lattimore, since so many of his followers have been trying to tell us there
is no Moscow control over China's Reds. If they follow every twist and turn of
the Moscow line they are evidently not Chinese nationalists as we understand
the term, but psuedo nationalists.
A. T. Steele and Andrew Roth of the New York Herald Tribune and the
Nation, respectively, after getting out of Red Peiping recently, declared that
the Chinese Red leaders are in every sense of the word Communists who stand
squarely and faithfully for the Moscow party line, and will join the Kremlin in
the coming World War III against the imperialist powers, particularly America.
They likewise agree that while ]\Iao might possibly become an extreme nationalist
at some future date, another Tito, there is ab.solutely no evidence that this is a
factor to be seriously reckoned with for a long time, IMr. Lattimore to the con-
trary notwithstanding. Spencer Moosa, latest newsman out of Peiping, con-
firms their statements. The very first movie put on by the Reds in the auditorium
of the Catholic University in Peiping after they moved in this year was the Life
of Stalin. Need we say it was not anti-Rus-sian? And so. instance after instance
shows the very close connection between Moscow and Chinese communism that
has been witnes.sed throughout the last 28 years by intelligent observers who
have lived in Red China — where Mr. Lattimore lijis nev,er lived.
To the average American, whom the Red propaganda is intended to victimize,
it seems quite natural that Mao Tse-tung a native of China who has never
visited Moscow, should think first of China's instead of Russia's interests. Yet
how many native-born Americans are there who, once they join the party, think
nothing of selling out their country and its secrets to the Kremlin? Such is the
strange mesmerism exercised by their Moscow masters. It is. then, no harder
to understand Mao's utter devotion to the party line than it is to understand
that of P^oster, or Dennis, or Earl Browder. After all, remember, a real Com-
munist has no country. And surely Mao has pi-oved he is a 100-percent Com-
munist. Let's not be deceived any longer, then, by this fake nationalism of
China's Reds, which is the central thesis of Mr. Lattimore's recent book, The Situ-
ation in Asia.
If a man who had written 10 volumes about Africa, and thereby won a name
for himself as an authority, should nevertheless maintain that the Ne^ri^es in
Africa aren't really black but white, it would be a cause for wonder. Mr. Owen
Lattimore, who has written 10 books on Asia and is called the best informed
American on Asiatic affairs living today is doubtless well-informed on many
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
Asiatic matters but unfortunately, if we are to take his written words as an
index of liis linowledtie of China's Reds, lie is very badly misinformed about the
true color of that most important body of individuals and their whole way of
acting. Which reminds me of a recent conversation with one of Mr. Lattimore's
OWI boys who had just returned from a P, years' correspondent assignment in
iChina. I aslved him why it was that practically all of our foreign newsmen,
though supposedly educated in the American tradition of fair play, spoke entirely
of corruption in the Chiang regime but said nothing about the corruption in the
Mao regime. And this man, who was being paid for giving his American readers
an honest picture of conditions in the vital Far East, answered, "Because there
is no corruption in the Red regime." I laughed at him for wasting his 3 years
in the Orient and passed him an article showing that not only is the Red regime
•corrupt, but from every conceivable American standpoint it is conservatively 10
times more corrupt than its current opposite number.
It is probably of such men that IMr. Lattimore. in his book Situation in China
(p. 277) writes : "Hitherto American observers who have been acutely conscious
of secret police activities in Kuomintang, China, have had nothing comparable to
report from Communist China." The reason is that these official observers
Avere allowed the freedom to observe the limited activities of KMT secret policy,
while they aren't even permitted to enter Red China. Had they wished,
though, they could have learned a lot from people, some of them Americans,
who had lived in Red China. They would have heard, for instance, about the
T'ing Chung hui, or eavesdropper corps, who, after killing off all watchdogs,
creep up at night, next to the wall or on the flat roofs of North China homes, to
liear what is being said inside the family about the Communists. Children are
rewarded for si)ying on their parents and, if anyone is believed to be guilty of
ranti-Communist remarks, a terror gang swoops down at midnight and the
chances are the unfortunate victim will be discovered next morning buried alive
outside his home. This sort of secret police and terrorism combined has been
■so universal in Red China that if ]Mr. Lattimore doesn't know about it he knows
■extremely little of Chinese communism.
As far back as 1945 the predominant sentiment everywhere in Red areas was
fear, universal fear, fear at every instant, according to an official report of a
Frencliman, a formei' university professor from Tientsin who spent the years
from 1941 to 1945 in Red territory, and had been hailed before both Japanese
;iud Red tribunals. "It is not terror," he says, "for terror is a fear which shows
itself exteriorally. Here one must not allow his fear to be seen ; he must appear
■satisfied and approve everything that is said and done. It is a hidden fear, but
a creeping, paralyzing fear. The people keep quiet. They do not criticize;
they avoid passing out any news. They are afraid of their neighbor, who may
■denounce them. They are afraid of the Reds who might hear and imprison them.
When the Reds impose a tax, it is paid without a word. If they requisition
anyone for public work, the work is done carefully and rapidly, without need of
any blows and curses as in the time of the Japanese, and wonderful to say,
without any need of supervision. (This is amazing to anyone who knows the
easy-going Chinese character.) I have witnessed groups of workers along the
big highways built by the Japanese, doing exactl.v the same kind of work they
did for the Japanese, but how different their attitude. There was no foreman
there to supervise, and yet everything was done carefully, with hardly a word,
"Without the least bit of joking." Mr. Lattimore, with his lack of background,
anight interpret this as a sign of enthusiasm for the Red masters. But the report
states simply, "They were afraid."
What was true in 194n in Red areas is also true today according to the very
latest 1949 reports that have filtered through the bamboo curtain : "There isn't
too much suffering from hunger in the cit.v, but it is impossible to lay up any
reserves. The Communists search every house methodically and confiscate any
surplus. Anyone who complains or criticizes them disappears mysteriously,
buried alive, it is said. No one dares say a word, even to his best friend. In
the country districts conditions are terrible. Tlie Reds take everything; grain,
livestock, clothing, tools, and now all are being mobilized for army service.
Paniine reigns everywhere together with fear. The people endure this with
clenched teeth, but when asked how things are going always answer, 'Everything
is going well.' " They had better !
These reports come from reliable people who were there and know what they
are talking about, and who ridicule the fairy tales Mr. Lattimore from his distant
and comfortable chair in Johns Hopkins spins for eager young Americans w^ho
believe he is an authority on China's Reds. What, for example, could be further
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 99
from (he tiuth tli.iii this statement in the Situation in China, page 160: "la
C^hina it may be conceded" (not by anyone who l^nows the situation, though, if
I may interrupt) "that the Communists hold the confidence of the people to
such an extent that they can probably do more by persuasion, with less resort
to coercion, than any previous revolutionaries in history. But the Communists
cannot indulge in I'xperimenls which the people do not accept, because the armed
and organized peasants would be iible to resist them just as they have hitherto
resisted the return of the landlords.' Sheer nonsense! The only real landlords
left in Red areas are the Red leaders themselves, and the people know enough
not to try to resist these ruthless masters. For some reason, no one seems to
relish being buried alive ; and so the Commvmists can indulge in absolutely any
experiment they choose without the slightest open resistance from the peasants^
who are merely awaiting patiently for better days.
Since Mr. Lattimore is patently in error on so many vital points connected
with the China Red question, it becomes more and more strange that his acfvice'
on Red China should be followed almost slavishly by the United States State'
Department. It has already brought China to disaster and may, if we continue
to follow it. also ruin America. It might be well to consider what advice he
has given for future United States policy so we shall know what a new litany
of Lattimore disasters awaits us.
He has a chapter on Japan in his Situation in Asia and. although he admits
General MacArthur is a first-class administrator, he dislikes his "fatherly
mysticism" and "oldline Republicanism", hints it would have been wiser to give
the Russians more say, considers the present policy as pseudo-realistic and
bound to fail. "It's likely to blow up in our faces, like a humiliating stink
bomb," damaging MacArthur's reputation in the end. He doesn't like keeping
the Emperor, nor the type of democracy MacArthur is giving, apparently prefer^
ring for Japan the totalitarian type Mao Tse-tung is employing in China. Mr^
Lattimore doesn't like to see Japan make a bulwark against Russian expan-
sion, and believes that since she is possessed of the most advanced technical
and managerial know-how in Asia she will eventually make her own terms with
both Russia and China, without consulting the Ignited States.
"The Japanese, watching America's failure to control the situation in China
through the Kuomintang. have been giggling in their kimono sleeves. In a queer
way it has helped to restore their self-respect for their own failure on the con-
tinent." He sees no future for Japan apart from the future of Asia, since she
needs the iron and coal of Manchuria and the markets of China.
In this he is probably right ; that is why it was always to Amei-ica's vital
interest to see that the open door policy and the territoi-ial integrity of China
were preserved, though this adviser to our State Department did not think
them very important. He considers east Asia now definitely out of control by
either Russia or America, stating that it forms a group of "third countries"
which seem to resemble Nippon's ill-fated "East Asia coprosperity sphere." He
lielieves Japan, then, will come to tei-ms both with Communist Russia and Com-
munist China, and will end b.v being more anti-American than anti-Russian.
If we had only adopted his plan foi- a Japanese democracy right after the
war, what a deal of trouble we would have saved !
What, now, are his plans for the mainland? He has long been in favor of a
Chiang coalition with the Reds, and blames our sOth Congress for spoiling
that. The result is now Communist control — which of course would have even-
tuated just as well had his original coalition idea gone tlirough. We mustn't
lay down our own conditions for dealing with a Red China, he says, or we-
shall spoil our favorable position with the Chinese. Has he never heard how
Mao"s Reds detest Americans, and hold half a dozen United States consids
under house arrest? "We must at all costs avoid the appearance of wanting:
to punish the Chinese people for having a government which we didn't approve-
for them in advance." As if the Chinese were really anxious for a puppet Red
regime. We mu.st not support any rump government, for that would be dividing-
China. We must extend credits to poor Red China and help build it up by trade-
and American eiigineeriim know-lunv as "Fot-d Motors and General Electi-ic
did in Taissia in the period between war-^." But let's not lay down any condi-
tions for our aid, by insistim,' that Red China be hostile to Red Russia. '
And if all that isn't enough to make Uncle Sam suspect that Owen Lattimore-
is making a fool o>it of him in the interests of world (-ommuiiism, the expert
goes mu(-h further: "The new government of China will claim China's Big
Five position in the L'nited Nations. in(-luding the riuht of veto. By the use of
our own veto we could delay China in moving into this position," but of course it
100 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY IXVEISTIGATION
would be unfair to deprive Russia of another vote, especially since Russia has
had nothing whatsoever to do with iniposiug communism on China ! See now
why the pinks are so strong on their insistence that the Red movement in
<'hina is purely nationalistic? And another vote for Mother Russia?
Let's take Outer Mongolia, that voted unanimously to be annexed to Russia in
1945 — each voter being required to sign his name on his ballot. "Mongolia,"
lie says, "is between a Communist-ruled Russia and a Communist-controlled
China. It would be an advantage to American policy to be able to emphasize
that there is a country occupying 600,000 square miles of territory * * *
inhabited by people who are neither Chinese nor Russians. It is impossible
to make use of this advantage unless the separation of Outer Mongolia is em-
phasized by membership in the United Nations * * *. It is true that Mon-
golia as a member of the United Nations would mean another vote for Russsia:
but would this be a greater disadvantage than our present comiilete lack of
access to this key country between China and Russia?" (p. 226).
Yes. IMr. Lattimore. it would. Considering that the whole United States had
but one vote in the United Nations while Russia started out witli three, it is
simply wonderful f)f Owen Lattimore to give a couple more Far East satellite
votes to our cold war enemy. Since he is one of the chief advisers to our Far
Eastern State Department DureaTi. is it any wonder that disaster has been piled
on disaster in .\sia for Americans while world connuvnism engages in Irenzied
applause? If ^Ir. Lattimore is permitted to turn over one far eastern vote after
another to Russia, Moscow will soon dominate the United Nations, and then can
safely discard the veto. Why should one man, whose writings show he has no
knowledge of the character of China's Reds, be allowed to go on unchallenged
promoting chaos and ruining Christianity in Asia? Ti-ue, he doesn't say he
wants a Red Asia : but tlie publisher of his Situation in Asia indic-ates his inten-
tions when on the .jacket of the l)ook they print a maii of Lattimore's Asia,
including Japan, Sakhalin, all of China, the Philippines, the Dutch East Indies,
Siam, Burma, Malaya, and India, in nice Soviet Red.
That is the end of the quotation of Fatlier Kearney.
It is uncanny how these State Department policy makers are drawn
too;ether time after time in an organization or group or project of
pro-Soviet nature.
I now hand the committee a booklet setting forth the officers and
trustees of the Institute of Pacific Relations. It will be noted that
Mr. Lattimore is a trustee. It will be also noted from the book
I previously handed the Chair that this institute is listed as either
subversive or Conununist front by the California Un-American Activ-
ities Committee.
Senator Tydings. Where are the headquarters of the Institute of
Pacific Relations?
Senator McCarthy. One East Fifty-fourth Street. New York City
22, and my exhibit 29, Mr. Chairman, reads : "The officers and trustees
of the Institute of Pacific Relations invite you to become a member
of its American Council." This contains the name of our own Owen
Lattimore. It will be filed in the record.
The familiar pattern starts again with Messrs. Lattimore, Hanson,
Bisson, and Jessup.
In the Institute of Pacific Relations we have such ]iro-Communists
as Frederick Yanderbilt Field, Philip Jaffe, Kate L. INIitchell, Andrew
E,oth, and Nym Wales. Incidentally. I might mention that Nym
Wales, which is not her actual name, was the coeditor with Mr. Hanson
in the magazine he was running in Peiping at the time the Japanese-
-Chinese war broke out.
The Attorney General of the United States has declared the Amer-
ican Peace Mobilization to be a subversive organization and the House
XTn-American Activities Committee has placed the same stamp of
infamy on the Washington Committee for Aid to China.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 101
The American Peace iNIolMlizatioii was short-lived. It existed dur-
in<r tlie days of the Stalin-Hitler pact and was liquidated by the Com-
munists on the very day that Hitler invaded the Soviet Union.
Frederick Vanderbilt Field, one of the countrv's to]) Commiuiists,
was executive secretary of the American Peace ]\fobilization on Tues-
day evenin<r, February 11, 1941, also.
On that date, the "\Vashiiiaton Committee for Aid to China, held a
meeting at Sixteenth and O Streets NW., Washintrton.
At tlie time this meeting was held. President Roosevelt was under
the most savage attack of his career by Frederick Vanderbilt Field
and hi- American Peace Mobilization. That was when the Stalin-
Hitler pact still existed. That was when they were calling Roosevelt
a Avai'monger in no uncertain terms.
The Senators may recall that this was the occasion when the Amer-
ican Peace ]\ro1)ilization oi'ganized and carried out a 24-hour picket
line around the White House. The pickets carried placards denouncing
Roosevelt as a warmongering tool of Wall Street. That was while the
Hitler-Stalin pact existed.
On June 21, 1941, the American Peace Mobilization pickets were
still surrounding the White House. When Hitler invaded the Soviet
Union on the morning of June 22, the pickets were withdrawn within
an hour. The party line had changed in a matter of minutes and
the American Peace Mobilization then bei^ame the American People's
Mobilization, urging the immediate entrance of the United States
into the war.
Again, associated with Frederick Vanderbilt Field, we have Owen
Lattimore as the principal speaker at the above meeting on the eve-
ning of February 11, 1941, with only two other speakers. One of
them was Frederick Vanderbilt Field.
Here again we have the oUl familiar pattern of a member of the
important policy-making group of the State Department collaborat-
inir with known Communists under the sponsorship of organizations
officially declared subversive.
I want to again direct the committee's particular attention to the
fact that while Owen Lattimore was with Frederick Vanderbilt
Field, this was the same Field who, on the 22d day of June, the day
after Hitler invaded Russia, promptly changed his line of attack, the
same great .and good friend of Owen Lattimore.
Senator Tydixgs. While 3'ou are taking a little breath, I would
just like to take this opportunity to announce to the press that these
exhibits will be available in the keeping of the reporter immediately
after the conclusion of Senator INIcCarthy's testimony, because you
will want to see all of the names on here. I see ^Ir. Henry Luce's
name as one of the vice presidents of this organization.
Senator Hickexlooper. INIr. Chairman, I may suggest that there
are a number of other nsimes on there that are probably completely
on the otlier side of the feuce from Mr. Henry Luce, and I think it
is unfair for the chairman or anyone else to pick and choose two or
three names of respectable citizens who are on these lists and not
call attention to a numl)er of the Connnunists' names.
Seiiator Tydings. They were already pointed out by the witness.
I just wanted to point out one on the other side, not three or four.
Senator McCarthy. I might say that the other day as I handed
102 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
in the exhibits, as the Chair will recall, I was namino- the oiitstaiid-
ino- Communists whose names appeared on exhibit after exhibit. The
Chair objected to that and said he would have to name the respectable
people who are named -on a few of them. For that reason the Chair
will note that I have refrained from naming; all the well-known
Communists who appear on exhibit after exhibit, and I hope I have
made it clear in the past that one of the reasons why the Attorney
General, the House committee, the California connnittee, and various
other committees, have considered these front organizations so dan-
gerous is that from time to time they have succeeded in getting
respectable peoples' names on them. That is what has made them
dangerous.
Senator Tydings. I was of the impression, Senator McCarthy, that
you had read some supporting names. I might have been in error.
That is on page 1-A, where you say :
In the Institute of Pacific Relations, we have such pro-Communists as: Fred-
erick Vanderbilt Field, Philip Jaffe, Kate L. Mitchell, Andrew Roth, Nym Wales.
Senator McCarthy. The Chair is correct.
Senator Tydings. Following out Senator Hickenlooper's suggestion,
the Chair will read the lest of these names. I do not know a great
many of the people, but I will read their names. These are the of-
ficers and trustees of the Institute of Pacific Relations : First, officers
and board of trustees, American Council : Robert G. Sprout, chair-
man; Edward C. Carter, executive vice chairman; Joseph P. Cham-
berlain, Mortimer Graves, Henry W. Luce, Ray Lyman Wilbur, vice
chairmen.
Ray Lyman Wilbur was either a Secretary in the Ploover Cabinet
or is the head of one of the universities in California, I don't know
which.
Brooks Emeny, treasurer; Tillie G. Shahn, assistant treasurer; and
Lawrence Morris, secretary.
The members of the board of trustees are Edward W. Allen, Ray-
mond B. Allen, Christian Arndt, Paid S. Bachman, Eugene E. Bar-
nett. Pearl S. Buck, George Cameron, Edward C. Carter, Joseph P.
Chamberlain, Allan E. Charles, Lauchlin Currie, John L. Curtis,
Joseph S. Davis, A. L. Dean, Arthur Dean, Len De Caux, Dorothy
Douglas, Brooks Emeny, Frederick V. Field, Henry Field, Galen M.
Fisher.
Also (t. W. Fisher, Charles K. Gamble, Clarence E. Gauss, Mrs.
Frank Gerbode, Huntington Gilchrist, A. J. Gock, Carrington Good-
rich, Henry F. Grady, Mortimer Graves, Achniral John AV. Green-
slade, William R. Herod, John Hersey, the writer; Paul G. Hoffman,
William C. Johnstone, Owen Lattimore, Charles F. Loomis, Henry
R. Luce, publisher of Life, Time, and Fortune magazines; Charles E.
Martin, Mrs. Alfred McLaughlin, Abbot Low Moffat, Harriet L.
Moore, George Abbot IMorison, Lawrence Morris, A. W. Robertson.
Also Chester Rowell, Robert G. Sproul, G. Nye Steiger, Donald
Straus, George Taylor, Juan Trippe, president of Pan American Air
Liues; Henry A. Wallace. Louis Weiss, Sunnier Welles, Lynn White,
Jr., Brayton Wilbur, Ray Lyman AVilbur, Herbert J. Wood, and Mrs.
Louise L. Wright.
The M'itness will proceed.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 103
Sonntor IMcCarthy. I now h:\ud you, Mr. Chainuan, exhibit 30,
entitled ''National Enieriiency Conference for Democratic Kiohts."
On April 21, 1943, the House ^'onmiittee on Appropriations issued a
report citinir this oroanization as "'subversive and un-American."' On
March i2i), the House Special Connnittee on Un-American Activities
cited it as a Oonununist front.
On September '2, 19-1:7, on page 12 of its Report No. 1115, the con-
gressional Committee on Un-American Activities said :
It will be reiiit'inhered that dnriiis the days of the infamous Soviet-Nazi pact
the Goiunmnists Imilt a protective ()rganizati<in known as the National Emer-
gency Conference for Democratic R'ghts, which culminated in the National Fed-
eration for Constitutional Liberties.
In its 19-48 report, on pages 112 and 327 the California Committee
on Un-American Activities, after citing it as a Communist-front or-
ganization, defending Communists, had this to say :
After the dissolution of the American League for Peace and Democracy in
February 1J)40, the Communist Party frantically organized a new series of front
organizations. The National Emergency Conference for Democratic Rights
was one of the new fronts and it was filled from top to bottom with veteran
Connnunist Party-liners.
The Maryland Association for Democratic Rights was an aililiate
of the National Emergency Conference for Democratic Rights. At
a conference of this organization in Baltimore early in 1944, we have
as sponsors Mr. Owen Lattimore and his wife.
I might say I for one believe, and I think the committee will agree
with me after they have gone into this in detail, that Owen Lattimore
was not a dupe who joined these Communist-front organizations by
mistake. He was one of the allegedly respectable men who got some
actually respectable names on this list.
Senator Tydings. Senator, allow me to interrupt you a moment.
I don't know a lot of these people in this Baltimore chapter. Some of
them I do knoAv. Some of them I know very slightly; some of them I
don't know at all.
I am not going to read the list in the record, but I would like, inas-
nnich as the chairman is from Maryland, to notify any Maryland
papers or press services that are going to circulate in Maryland that
a copy of all these names is available here at the head table if they
want it.
Thank you. Senator.
Senator jMcCartiiy. I might say most likely the ones the Senator
knows are the good, outstanding people.
Senator Tydixgs. The ones that I see there are the ones that have
o]:)posed me pretty generally in a good many elections. I don't mean
all of them, but I recognize some of them.
Senator IMcCarthy. We Avill consider that as proof that they were
wrong.
I assume that Mr. Lattimore, a high State Department official, un-
doubtedly did get some hue Baltimore people to associate their names
with that. He must have known that a year previous to that time
this was declared a subversive, Communist-front organization. Most
likely any Baltimore people who are on that, whose names are on
that paper, did not know that that organization had been declared sub-
versive a year before. --.
689-70—50 — pt. 1 8 v-J
104 STATE DEPARTMETN'T EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVE'STIGATION
Senator Tydings. There are some names on there that I recognize,
that I am sure he would exculpate from any desire to be in any dis-
loyal organization. There are some others that I do not know, but
I recognize three or four representative names.
Senator McCarthy. Thank you, sir.
Once again we have a policy-making State Department attache col-
laborating with those who have sworn to destroy the Nation by force
and violence.
I find it impossible to visualize this sort of a good security risk under
yardstick of loyalty outlined by Secretary of State Acheson.
I hand the committee an exhibit of the Writers' Congress of 194:3.
This will be exhibit No. 31.
On December 1, 1917, and on September 21, 1918, the then Attorney
General Tom Clark in letters to the Loyalty Eeview Board, cited the
Hollywood Writers' Mobilization as subversive and communistic. In
its 1945 report on page 130, the California Committee on Un-American
Ati'airs described this organization as one "whose true purpose" was
"the creation of a clearing house for Communist propaganda."'
On October 1, 2, and 3 of 1913, the Writers' Congress and the Holly-
wood Writers' Mobilization held a meeting on the University of Cali-
fornia-LA campus in Westwood. Appearing as the representative of
the Office of War Information was Mr. Owen Lattimore.
Here again we have Mr. Lattimore involved as a principal in an or-
ganization declared un-American by the Attorney General of the
United States.
In the magazine, Pacific Affairs, of September 1938, Owen Latti-
more described the Moscow purge trials as a "triumph for Democracy."
In his book, entitled "Solution in Asia," Owen Lattimore declares
tliat among the people of Asia, the Soviet Union has "a gi-eat power
of attraction — it stands for democracy."
Let me repeat that. Here is the man shaping our Asiatic policy.
He said this in his own book. No one else has said this for him. Owen
Lattimore has said, in his book entitled "Solution in Asia," "that among
the people of Asia, the Soviet Union has a great power of attraction —
it stands for democracy.
I submit that the background of Mr. Lattimore, his close collabora-
tion and affiliation Avith numerous Communist organizations; his
friendship and close cooperation with pro-Communist individuals,
leaves absolutely no doubt that he is an extremely bad security risk
under Secretary of State Acheson's yardstick of loyalty or under any
other yardstick you could apply, and in fact, his wide knowledge of
far eastern affairs and his affinity for the Soviet cause in that area
might well have already done this Nation incalculable and irreparable
harm.
So much for Mr. Lattimore.
Now, Mr. Chairman, I shall be prepared to give the committee what-
ever additional information I can at such other meeting as the Chair
decides to call me. I might say tliat in view of the fact that the Chair
said that Judge Kenyon might or might not be here tomorrow, I would
appreciate it very<,much to know at the earliest possible time whether
he wants me to appear tomorrow, and if so, at what time. I can't be
called at the last minute and asked to come up here, because it does
take a tremendous amount of night and day work for me to get these
cases in shape.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVEISTIGATION 105
Senator TYniX(;s. I would sa}' to Senator McCarthy tliat the matter
lip before the Senate is not the liousin*; bill but the FDIC. You have
been under ri<iht nuich of a strain there to read for an hour and a half
or so. I think it woidd be very wise, with your a]>i)roval, as the housing
bill is not on the lloor today, if we were to take a recess, which is at
\ o'clock, and come back, let us say, at half past two, which w^ould give
the Senator time to eat and get his next case in order.
AVould that l>e satisfactory ?
Senator McCarthy. I understood. Mr. Chairman, the agreement
was that we would recess when we got through, and I simply am going
to have to insist that I cannot spend all morning and all afternoon on
these cases. It takes me a long time to get them in sliape. I have been
w'orking just about around the clock <;etting tliese cases in shape for
the connnittee, and I cannot work night and day only in preparation
for the connnittee. I will come before the committee every forenoon.
1 just simply cannot spend every forenoon and afternoon here. There
is a great weahh of material to be gone over.
I might say this. Originally I had planned on coming here today
and giving the committee all of the information which I personally
had assembled in chronological order. I felt that the information that
1 have given in the Congressional Record from the secret files would be
sufficient to show that a sizeable number of individuals are bad security
risks, and that the connnittee w^ould develop all of those cases.
However, when I mentioned that to one of the newspaper men the
other day, the State Department heard it and promptly there was a
tremendous amount of screaming on the air and in the press that
McCarthy wasn't ]:)resenting all of his cases.
In view of that I am going to try and give the committee all con-
ceivable details of those cases. That is a hard job. I w^ill bring that
up to date as I possibly can.
Let me say this also. I think we have an unusual situation develop-
ing, an unUsual campaign over in the State Department. It seems
that whenever Dean Acheson wants to do any name calling or issue
any press releases it is clone in the name of a very likeable and fine
young fellow, a harmless young man by the name of Peurifoy. It is
a clever attempt to shift on to Peurifoy the blame for Acheson's
activities. We all know that Mr. Peurifoy has no more power to dis-
charge a ilian like Hanson or Lattimore than the President's aide has
to discharge the President, and I just hope very soon the Secretary of
State has enough guts to stand up and say "This is my baby ; I will
take the blame for the sort of situation that has been disclosed" and
quit shoving the blame on to the shoulders of a very fine young man
who must do as he is told.
Senator Tydi^'gs. I did not interrupt you, but that has nothing
to do with the evidence before this committee. Our job is to hear
evidence that has to do with disloyalty in the State Department and
other bi'anchos of the Government where State De]iartment employees
liave gone.
You have given us an outline of 81 cases. It is the policy of the
chairman, I am sure, supported unanimously by the committee, that
we will get those files, and we ho))e to organize this week and start
work on them. If you have anything you wish to add to your testi-
mony on the floor of the Senate, we will be very glad to have it, or
any other cases you may have that you want to present.
106 STATE DEPARTMETnTT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVEISTIGATION
When I talked to yon on Friday, yon told me that yon thonght you
conld finish the presentation of yonr case today, if yon were not
interrnpted, in abont 4 or 5 honrs. Yon told Senator Lodge that^
and I so announced it to the press.
We have made our arrangements to sit today, this afternoon or
tonight, if possible, to give yon the opportunity that you wanted,
and we have made our arrangements accordingly. I think if you
could help US by coming back at 2 : 30, so long as the situation on
the Senate floor did not require you to go, it would be better if we
conld finish this afternoon, rather than have a niglit session. That
will not preclude you, of course, from giving us additional informa-
tion. We simply wanted to get the files of what we are to investigate
pretty clear before we turned it over to the staff which we will shortly
name, in more or less one piece, rather than to string it out so we
could set up an over-all system to check and cross check at the very
beginning. You can appreciate that that would be the thorough way
to do it.
Senator McCarthy. I think the chairman has a very commendable
idea. I might say, however, that as I said before, this is not the only
task I have, presenting this evidence. I have a State and a lot of
people in that State. I have to take care of their interests also. I
have been working almost 24 honrs a day getting these cases in shape.
I simply cannot work all morning and all afternoon before this com-
mittee. The most I can do is to give the committee half a day of
my time, and I will be glad to do that on any day. I will be glad to
present these cases, and I think they are of suflicient import so that
the committee will want to hear them. If not, that is entirely up to
the committee.
Senator IIickenlooper. I strenuously object and do object to night
sessions. I reserved that right the other day. I am not going to
sit in night sessions if I can help it.
Senator Tydings. Senator McCarthy, could yon come back at 2 : SO
or 3 o'clock with more material, today?
Senator McCarthy. I have told the Chair that I will give the com-
mittee my mornings. I just can't give them all day. I don't want to
ajipear arbitrary, but this has been a tremendous task. My office staff
i.s almost on the verge of quitting. I have been working them all
night. I worked them all day Sunday and all Sunday night. I must
have time to get this material in shape.
As I say, I had originally planned on giving the committee the
material principally from the Congressional Record on many of these
individuals, giving them all of the leads. However, I find that the
Secretary of St^te is demanding that I personally give the committee
more. I think maybe he is right in this case, so I will give the com-
mittee more stuff. I will give them cases that are more fully developed
outside of the secret files.
I might say that in the Hanson case yon have a complete case with-
out any files at all. I think the files will be of interest to you.
In the Brunauer case. I do sincerely hope the committee takes that
case immediately and goes into it and gets the files. Tliere is plenty
of work for the committee to start on. They need not wait until I
present more cases. If no other case were presented except the
Brunauer case and if she is gotten out of this top-secret position, it
STATE DEPARTMEJS-T EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 107
"Would justify the committee's existence, it would justify the spend-
in<2: of all the money the Senate has authorized the committee to spend.
Senator Tydixgs. It hasn't authorized any, yet.
Senator McCarthy. Let's start on that one.
Senator Tydixgs. I would like to say that the committee hasn't had
a dollar put at its disposal yet. There has been no authorization,
■but I am hopino; that today we will get some money.
Senator, the chairman of the committee is certainly not going to
press you. You are carrying a heavy burden. We are all carrying
.a heavy burden, too. I haven't been in my office to do any work now
for 4 or 5 or 6 days, and I have a bunch of people down there who are
.after me, almost beside themselves, to get some decisions, and that is
the reason I tried to get the thing under way today and hoped we
•could have concluded, but if you are not ready there is no reason why
you should not have a fair chance to produce it. It would help us
all to plan our lives if w-e could know about what you estimate — we
are not going to hold you to it — the additional time that you will re-
quire to present tlie matter that you have in mind.
Senator McCarthy. I want the Chair to know that I am not trying
to evade giving him an estimate, but let me say this. It wdll be ex-
tremely difficult to estimate. I have in my office now letters from
people, some of them having good information, some of them the
typical crackpot letters which one gets, giving information and tips
in a vast numljer of these cases. I find that some of them develop un-
usually fast. In fact, much of the material that I am presenting
tomorrow morning frankly was not in my hands the day I spoke on
the Senate floor. When I say "tomorrow," I mean the next day you
can hear me.
The information that I have presently developed, the cases that I
am ready to start on tomorrow or the next day, whenever I am called,
those cases will still take, I think, more than t^ie 5 hours which I
mentioned to the Chair last Friday. The Chair was not misquoting
me. I did tell the Chair that I thought I could get rid of all these
■cases in 5 hours without any interruptions.
I frankly don't know, Mr. Chairman. I think it will take another,
oh. at least 2 or 3 days, spending the entire forenoon without inter-
ruptions — I mean without any unnecessary interruptions.
Senator Ttdings. That gives us some line on it. Then I take it it is
the Senators position that he does not want to go on any more today.
Senator jNIcCarthy. Mr. Chairman, I would like to have this un-
derstanding, that I will not be asked to spend any afternoons or even-
ings on this. I think if I give the committee my mornings, then I
should liaTe tlie afternoons and evenings for my own work and to
further develop these cases.
Senator Tydixgs. We will try to conform to the Senator's wish.
Might I ask him if he would object to meeting earlier than we have
been meeting, so we could get more in?
Senator McCarthy. Xo objection at all, Mr. Chairman. I might
say, when I suggested 9 o'clock, I heard a great protest from all of
the members of the press.
Senator T-ydrsgs. I think the connnittee would like to get half an
Lour in the office before they come up here, but we will just have to
amike up ;om- minds to put up with some inconvenience, all of us.
108 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY IX^•E'tSTIGATION
I am going to say to the Senator I have not talked with Miss Kenyon.
I presume she will w^ant to go on tomorrow. If she isn't ready to
go on tomorrow, then the Senator, I take it, would be ready to start
again tomorrow.
Senator McCarthy. That is correct.
Senator Hickenlooper. I understood she sent word to the Chairman
she would be here to go on.
Senator Tydings. That is right, but that was last week, in response
to a pretty quick telegram. I haven't seen her and haven't communi-
cated with her and have had no word directly or indirectly from
her. If she wants to take another day, I think we ought to give it to
her. She was not here to hear the charges. She has to read them and
become up-to-date on them, and so on.
But, without objection, we will take a recess until 9 : 30 o'clock to-
morrow morning, at which time I w411 ask Senator McCarthy to be
ready to go on with his testimony.
Senator McCarthy. Wait, Mv. Chairman: I would like to know
definitely How soon can you contact Judge Kenyon?
Senator Tydings. We can take you up imtil 12 or 12:30, so long
as you want to go on with us, and then we can go on with Miss Kenyon
in the afternoon, so in any event, if you will be ready tomorrow we
can dispose of you and Judge Kenyon most likely at the same time.
Senator McCarthy. In other words, I can definitely assume I will
go on at 9 : 30 in the morning?
Senator Tydings. And we Avill try to run until 12 : 30, and come
back and give Judge Kenyon the afternoon. I do not know that she
win want to go on. I imagine she will.
(Whereupon, at 1 : 15 p. m., the hearing was recessed, to reconvene
the following day, Tuesday, March 14, 1950, at 9 : 30 a. m.)
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE
LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
TUESDAY, MARCH 14, 1950
UxiTED States Sexate,
COMMI-JTEE ON FoREIGN KeLATIONS,
Subcommittee Appointed Under Senate Resolution 231,
Wa^^hington, D. O.
Tlie subcommittee met, pursuant to ndjouriuneut on March 13, 1050^
at 9 : 40 a. m. in room 318, Senate Office Building, Senator Millard E.
Tvdiuirs (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
Present : Senators Tydings (chairman of the subcommittee) , Green,
McMahon, and Hickenlooper.
Also present : Senator McCarthy.
Senator Tydings. The committee will please come to order.
Wliile YOU are getting your papers ready, Senator McCarthy, the
Chair Avould like to make an announcement.
The committee has appointed, as its chief counsel, Mr. Edward P.
Morgan, who was born May 28, 1913. After graduating from law
school, Georgetown University, with degrees from other universities,
Mr. Morgan, in March of 1940, was appointed as special agent of the
Federal Bureau of Investigation. Following services in the field with
the FBI, he was, in succession, a supervisor at FBI headquarters;
assistant special agent in charge of FBI field offices: and special agent
in charge of the Providence, R. Ir, and Albany, N. Y., field offices.
In the spring of 1945, he was appointed chief inspector at FBI
headquarters, having under his supervision and direction all inspec-
tion matters involving the 52 FBI field offices in the United States
and its Territories.
While associated with the FBI, Mr. Morgan made a special study
of Communists, Fascists, and other totalitarian ideologies, and lec-
tured to FBI agents and police officers from all over the world on
such matters.
Now, proceed, Senator McCarthy.
But, before proceeding, may I say further that Mr. Morgan is not
now with the FBI, but is a member of a Washington law firm.
The committee is going to admonish its fellow members, and also
witnesses, to try to get here on time. The chairman expects to get
here on time every morning unless he is in an accident, and hopes all
others will do likewise.
TESTIMONY OF HON. JOSEPH R. McCARTHY, UNITED STATES
SENATOR FROM WISCONSIN— Resumed
Senator McCarthy. I think the Chair's clock is fast.
Mr. Chairman, in this case I have some reports from various intel-
ligence files, and some of the matei-ial I think will be of a great deal
109
110 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATIOISr
of interest to the committee. The copies of the reports which I am
handing to the committee contain a complete copy of the files. How-
ever, in reading this, yon will find that I will omit some of the material
which is in your intelligence report, and in the copies that go to the
press. The committee will find that I have deleted sections of the
files dealing with — well, the purpose will be obvious to the Chair.
Senator Tydings. You ai-e not going to read that i Do you want to
make it a part of the record ?
Senator McCarthy. I want to make it a part of the record also.
Senator TydinCxS. If you will desist until we get a chance to look
this over.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman, I intend to i-ead the entire
document.
Senator Tydings. You have this marked on toj) "For committee use
only."
Senator McCarthy. Here is the copy with certain portions of the
intelligence report deleted.
Senator Tydings. Will you give this copy to Senator Lodge, Sen-
ator Hickenlooper ?
Will you give this to Senator McMahon, Senator Green ?
Just hold up a minute, Senator McCarthy. You only gave us one
copy of your opening remarks. Will you give us a copy for each com-
mittee member ?
Senator McCarthy, may I ask if this contains a part of the material
you will read?
Senator McCarthy. Let me make myself clear. The material I am
giving the Chair contains copies of intelligence reports concerning this
man I am about to cover, Gustavo Duran. Parts of the report are such
that I do not think they should go out to the public. The reason will
be very obvious if the Chair will compare the portions I have deleted.
If I start explaining why they shottld not go out
Senator Tydings. I just wanted to get the record straight. So it is
fair to say that what j^ou have given us for committee use only is not
to be released by the committee until after they have had a chance to
look at it.
Senator McCarthy. And I am offering the deleted copies
Senator Tydings. Just a minute. Senator.
Senator McCarthy, a very proper question has been asked me, and
that is : "What you have given us is a complete record of the intelli-
gence files of the individual, or is it just a partial record of it?"
Senator McCarthy. That is all of the file that I have. There un-
doubtedly is much more in the files, but this is as complete as I can
get it, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Tydings. This is all that you have?
Senator McCarthy. That is all that I have.
I might say I will give the Chair the photostatic copies, but I would
like to keep those until I finish my statement.
Senator Tydings. All I'ight, proceed.
Senator McCarthy. I offer this as exhibit 32.
Mr. Chairman, the committee will recall that the name of Gustavo
Duran was first mentioned by me as a possible bad security risk in a
speech which I made in Wheeling, W. Va., and Reno, Nev.
STATE DEPARTIMETsT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVEISTIGATION 111
Senator Tydixgs. May I ask a question in order to keep the record
strai<:;lit^ I don't know the man, aiid didn't hear of him before, and
didn't read your l\eno speech.
Senator MtCARTiiY. You missed something.
Senator Tydings. I will ask you whether you know, or not, whether
this man is in the State De})artment today.
Senator McCarthy. His position will be shown Avhen
Senator Tydixus. He is now in the Department?
Senator McCarthy. He was in the State Department. He is now
in the United Nations, as the Chair will notice as we go along,
I have called Trygve Lie's office to find out exactly what work he
is doing.
Strangely enough, the Secretary, rather his secretary, said they
couldn't give that information to me.
I checked with the State Department and got the information,
which is in the Register.
However, my physical check indicates that this man is in IRO, ap-
parently screening refugees in connection with our DP program.
Senator Tydixgs. Well, we will investigate the case, but what I
would like to know now is about when he left the State Department
here.
Senator McCarthy. Exactly, if the Chair will bear with me, all
the exact dates are in my report.
Senator Tydings. All right.
Senator McCarthy. At that time I said :
Now, let's see what happens when inclividiials with Communist connections
are forced out of the State Department. Gustavo Duran, who was labeled as
(1 Quote) "a notorious international Communist," was made assistant to the
Assistant Secretary of State in charge of Latin-American affairs.
I refer there to Mr. Spruille Braden, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Tydixgs. Just a moment. Senator Green; that is "For
committee use only."
His opening remarks are on this paper.
Go ahead, Senator.
Senator McCarthy. He was taken into the State Department fi'om
his job as a lieutenant colonel in the Communist International
Brigade. Finally, after intense congi-essional pressure and criticism,
he resigned in 1946 from the State Department — and, ladies and gen-
tlemen, where do you think he is now ?
Senator Tydings. I don't want to interrupt you, but I wonder if you
would be good enough to tell us who made that quote "a notorious
international Communist" ?
Senator IMcCartht. We will get to that.
Senator Tydings. You will get to that?
Senator McCarthy. Yes.
He took over a high-salaried job as Chief of Cultural Activities
Section in the Office of the Assistant Secretary General of the United
Nations.
Senator Greex. Excuse me. You say he was labeled. I think we
ought to know Ijy whom he was labeled.
Senator McCarthy. By our intelligence forces. If the Senator will
read the intelligence letters, the photostats I will give him
Senator Greex. I would like to read that and follow the testimony
better in that way.
112 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
Senator McCarthy. He was labeled in our own intelligence files.
I will give the Chair a complete photostat of all the files which have
been available, and I am sure the Senator will not question that after
lie reads the files.
This statement was promptly ridiculed by the Secretary of State
who — through Mr. Peurifoy — merely said that this man Duran was
no longer an employee of the State Department, but had been in the
auxiliary foreign service from January 1943 until September 1945,
and thereafter until October 4, 1946, in the Department. Mr. Peurifoy
added that Duran had voluntarily resigned from the State Department
on October 4, 1946.
One of the important facts that the Secretary overlooked in making
this press release is that this man is still, as of today, a high-salaried
official in the United Nations. On March 8 my office phoned the
office of Trygve Lie to find out exactly what type of woi-k he was doing.
My office was advised that information could not be given to me.
In other words, the information as to what Gustavo Duran is pres-
ently doing in the United Nations was not furnished me.
The State Department advised me that Duran is now Chief of the
Cultural Activities Section of the Department of Social Affairs, United
Nations.
I was rather surprised to find that the Permanent Secretary of the
United Nations felt he could not give to a United States Senator the
information as to what this man was doing. However, since that
time I have had the matter checked as well as possible in New York
and am informed he is actually with the International Refugee Or-
ganization, engaged in work having to do with screening refugees
coming into this country. The financial contribution which the United
States makes toward the running of this United Nations agency
amounts to 45.57 percent. (Taken from S. Kept. 1274, 81st Cong., 2d
sess.. Committee on Expenditures in the Executive Departments, pre-
pared by Subcommittee on Relations with International Organi-
zations.)
I might say that while the report shows that we pay 45.57 percent,
actually, of course, we are paying practically all of the cost, in view of
the fact that most of the nations that are contributing money are con-
tributing money which we have previously given them.
Senator Tydings. The same money ?
Senator ]\IcCarthy. Whether it is the same dollar or not does not
make any difference. If you put an American dollar in one pocket and
take out a French dollar from the other pocket to pay the expenses,
then what is the difference there.
Senator Tydings. In fairness, I don't think j^our remark is open to
the interpretation that if we had not given them this money they
would not have contributed. That is what you virtually are saying
there, and I don't think a'ou intend to say that.
Senator McCarthy." When we give some $5,000,000,000 to the
United Nations membership, and they take money, whether it is the
same dollar or not, to help pay for the UN work, obviously it is our
money. So, in effect, the 45.57 percent refers to money we put in
directly. It does not refer to American dollai's which obviously are
coming in indirectly.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY LNVEISTIGATION 113
Senator Tydings. Take the case of Great Britain. I feel pretty
sure that if the Britisli were not receiving a penny from us they would
still have repi'esentation and they would pay for themselves at the
United Nations.
]My only point was — the way you stated it — it looked as though they
would not have their representatives there if we did not pay for it.
I don't tliink you mean to convey that; that is my point.
Senator McCarthy. We can speculate on this, Mr. Chairman, but
it would seem that if we were not giving the nations what we are,
they would have to contribute more heavily directly. Whether that is
true or not is a matter of speculation, but the point, as a practical mat-
ter, we are paying much more than the approximate half that this
would indicate.
However, the Chair may have a different opinion.
Senatoi- Tydixgs. That is right ; but, as you have stated, you have
stated a fact, and a fact is only a matter of speculation and I don't
think we ought to have speculation in here. I think we ought to stick
to facts. That was my point.
Senator McCarthy. I think we should stick to facts. The fact is
that the committee says that we are paying practically 45.57 per-
cent
Senator Tydixgs. All right.
Senator McCarthy. The additional fact is that the other nations
which contribute 30 or 35 percent, whatever it happens to be, are
nations that are receiving four or five billions of dollars from us.
At the time that Acheson's man attempted to ridicule my statement,
he either did not know the facts in the case or he was covering up the
information which is in the files and which should have been known to
liim.
This information, which I shall document for the committee, was
known or was available to the State Department. It shows that Duran
was (1) well known for his rabid Communist beliefs and activities;
(2) that he was active in secret Soviet operations in the Spanish Re-
publican Army; (3) that a highly confidential report was sent to the
Stat* Department by the military attache at the American Embassy
in Madrid which, according to all existing rules, called for Duran's
immediate dismissal — unless the facts were proven to be wrong.
Originally." I understand it was claimed that this was a case of mis-
taken identity. That claim, I believe, has been subsequently dropped
in view of the fact that our intelligence produced pictures of him in
the uniform that he wore at the time he was the regional head of SIM,
which was the Spanish counterpart of the Russian NKVD or OGPU.
I now hand the committee one of those pictures.
Senator Hickexlooper. Do I understand, Senator, that that was
the Spanish secret police, the SIM?
Senator McCarthy. That was the secret police of the Spanish re-
publican regime.
Senator Tydixgs. I suppose both sides had secret police ; didn't they,
Senator?
Senator McCarthy. I assume that would be a fair supposition, Mr.
Chairman.
Senator Greex. IVIay I ask a question ?
Senator Tydixgs. Certainly.
114 STATE DEPARTMEISTT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVE'STIGATION
Senator Green. Do I luiderstand you to claim that because he was-
in the Spanish secret police that was evidence of his being a Com-
munist ?
Senator IMcCarthy. As I develop this, the Senator will discover that
Mr. Prieto, who was the Spanish Minister, appointed this man from
the army, as head of the SIM. He was then dissatisfied with his ac-
tivities. He was putting too many Communists is as the subheads..
As the Senator will find as a result of that, Prieto moved Duran back
to his army post as a major in the army, and that the Russian techni-
cians called on him and told him that unless Duran headed this SIM
unit they would break off relations with Prieto. The Russians said
"You must have this man as head of this regional SIM."
Prieto ignored them, and the relations were broken off' with this
Russian technical staff'.
Now, if the Senator will let me read the document, then if he still
has any questions, I will certainly be more than happy to answer
them. I wish he would let me give him the entire document, and I
don't think he will have any questions then.
I now hand the Chair the picture I referred to, which apparently
did away with the original contention that it was a case of mistaken
identity, so the claim of mistaken identity has been dropped.
At the time this intelligence report reached the State Department,.
Duran was a highly placed official in a confidential capacity with
the State Department in South America.
When the American people read the carefully prepared statement
put out by the Secretary of State's office in regard to the Duran state-
ment, they were entitled to rely upon it as being the truth. Un-
fortunately, anyone who believed that statement got a completely
erroneous impression of the actual facts.
"VVliichever way you wish to interpret this situation I submit to-
the committee that it is typical of the carelessness of the top executives
of the State Department of this country. The situation I have just
discussed is typical of the type of news releases emanating from the
State Dei')artment; it is typical of the half-truths we hear in answer
to the information which I have been developing in regard to the bad
security risks in that Department.
I now submit to the committee the intelligence report just referred
to in its entirety.
Senator Tydings. Senator McCarthy, I don't recall now — do you'
recall who was Secretary of State in 1945, when this happened?
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Acheson, I believe, was Under Secretary..
The Senator will recall. I lielieve, who the Secretary was.
I believe you will recall, sir, as Avell as I do.
Senator Tydings. I don't recall, because we changed so frequently
about that time.
Senator McCarthy. That is why I say I think you will recall as
well as I do, sir. I think it was Jimmie Byrnes, wasn't it ?'
Senator Tydings. Has anybody got the date ?
Senator McCarthy. Jimmie Byrnes was Secretary: the Chair will
recall that Grew was the Under Secretary, that Grew was the man
who insisted upon the prosecution of a man called Service, whose case
I shall deal with this morning: that Grew was forced — let us say he
retired or resigned 2 days later, after Acheson took over arid reinstated
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVEISTIGATION 115
Service. "We will <ret to that. l)iit I think that should refresh our
recollection as to who the Secretary was.
Senator Tydtxgs. Who was the Under Secretary of State at the
time 3'ou criticize the State Depaitnient for this particular transac-
tion ? I take it from your remarks it was Mr. Grew ?
Senator McCarthy. No, Mr, Chairman. I think ]\Ir. Grew did an
excellent joh. That is why he is no lon<rer there. Mr. Dean Acheson
was lender Secretary of State at this time. It was in 1946
Senator Tydixgs." In 1945?
Senator jMcCartiiy. AVe are speaking now — he was discharj^ed in
October 1946. accordino; to Mr. Acheson's own press release. I must
rely on that — October 4, 1946.
Senator Ttdings. Hold that there, because I think we mentioned
a date of 1945 a moment aero, and I want the record to show which
is correct. I want the record to be straight.
Mr. McCarthy. If the Chair will refer to the second last paragraph
on page 12, he will find that the press release of the State Department
shows that Duran was in the Department until October 4, 1946.
Senator Tydixgs. Let's refer to that.
Senator McCarthy. The fifth line from the bottom.
Senator Ty'DINGS. Let's refer to, that paragraph and get it in.
As I understand it, he has been in auxiliary foreign service from
January 1943 until September 1945.
Now, during that ]3eriod of time do you recall who was the Sec-
retary and the LTnder Secretary of State ?
Senator McCarthy. The Chair will have to put the name on him —
as to the exact date the different men resigned
Senator Tydixgs. Was Mr. Acheson in the Department during the
time from 1943 to 1945?
Senator McCarthy. The first we have of Mr. Acheson was in 1939.
He said he would vouch for Hiss completely. He was connected with
the Department then. Again, in 1943, at the time of the FBI inves-
tigation of Hiss, he was there then, and I assume was Assistant Secre-
tary at that time. He was made Under Secretary, Mr. Chairman,
at the time Joe Grew was forced out.
Senator Tydings. When was that?
Senator McCarthy. At the time of the Amerasia case in 1945.
Senator Tydixgs. Then, from 1943 to 1945, he could not have been
the Under Secretary.
Senator McCarthy. He could not have been the Under Secretary
before he Avas made Under Secretary, that is correct.
Senator Tydixgs. As I understand it — who was the Under Secre-
tary when ^Ir. Grew was forced out, as you say?
Senator McCarthy. I don't know when Grew took over. I don't
know the exact date he resigned. I connect the date of his resignation
with the Service case. He was reinstated 2 days before Grew resigned.
v^enator Tydings. The only reason I bring it up, you have usecl Mr.
Acheson's name several times, and I think it is important to show
whether or not he was Tender Secretaiy when the alleged service was
rendered to the country by the subject you refer to.
Senator McCarthy. I think that is a good question. Mr. Chairman.
Let us clear that up now.
If the Chair will refer to the ^photostatic copy of the intelligence
report
116 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVEISTIGATION
Senator Tydixgs. Is this it?
Senator McCarthy. Yes. Yon will find that five copies were given
to the State Department. I believe the date was in 1946; it is on the
report. At that time Mv. Acheson was the Under Secretary, I believe.
Senator Tydings. He didn't stay in very long after Acheson became
Under Secretary, according to yonr date.
Senator McCarthy. He stayed nntil October 4, 1946. Acheson be-
came Under Secretary in 1945'. If the Chair does not consider a year
a very long time
Senator Tydings. I don"t think any man can get the dossiers of
16,000 employees after 10 minutes, or within a short time of taking
over an office.
Senator McCarthy. Let's go on and see what Duran is doing now.
1 think this is important, and I will call attention to it — the State
T3epartment pnt out a carefully worded statement which certainly
did not contain the facts in my statement. I said this man had been
in the State Department. I pointed out this was an example of what
happens to an outstanding Communist when forced out. I pointed out
that he was over with the United Nations. The State Department put
out an answer to that saying, in effect, the last they knew of this man
was in October 1946.
Now, the State Department knows very well where this man is, and
I think one of the things the committee should investigate •
Senator Tydings. Just a minute — all right, go ahead.
Senator McCarthy. I think one of the things this committee should
.spend some time on is the question of how men like Duran, and these
other individuals with unusual backgrounds, shift so easily from the
State Department to the United Nations.
Senator Tydings. Senator, we will examine into everything.
Senator McCarthy. Someone, we know, using ordinary common
horse sense — we know someone in the State Department is shifting
them over. I think we should find out who.
Now, going on wuth our man Duran — it will be noted the State
Department received a copy of the intelligence report just referred to.
There are certain matters discussed in this report which I do not feel
should be made public until the committee has had a chance to thor-
oughly look into them. I have, therefore, deleted those sections from
the copies being handed to the press and will not read them into the
record at this time. The entire report, however, with nothing deleted,
is being handed to each of the members of the committee.
B. I. D. No. 7232
Report No. R~2!)f»/46
CONFIUENTIAL INTELLIGENCE REPORT
For general use by any United States Intelligence Agency
From : Military Attache. American Embassy, Madrid. Spain
June 4, 1946.
Source : Spanish Ai my Central General Staff B-3
Area Reported On : Spain
Who's Who : Gustavo Duran
Following is the report given the Military Attache by the A. C. of S., G-2,
Spanish Central (Jeneral Staff, after the M/A asked v\'hether Dnran was known :
"Gustavo Duran came to Madrid for the first time in the lS)20's from the
Canary Island, in the company of another Canarian. a painter called Nestor, who
was registered by tlie Spanish police for the same reasons — " as Durans * *
STATE DEPARTIME'NT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 117
[hlaiikins a poition <mtl * * * .^^^ ., fi-idul of Xt^stor, (Uistavo Duran.
became employed as a pianisr in the company of Antonia Merce the 'Arfientinita,'
and went to Berlin to participate in that capacity in dance sliows. However,
his — " * * * fhlankinii out a portion I * * * '•caused him to incur the fury
of the r.eiiin jxilice. wiiich linally ousted liim from Oermany.
"Similar trouble happened to him in other European cai)itals. His — " * * *
fa.iiain a blank space 1 * * * '-orew to the limit in Paris, which was the
preferied center for his activities sonu> years before tlie advent of the Spanish
Republic in 1J>31, while he was under the protection of his friend Nestor, the
painter, wlio was well known in certain Parisian quarters. About that time
the Soviets entrusted (Justavo Duran witli some missions and tinally appointed
him their aueiit.
■•Tpon the proclamation of the Spanish Republic, tlie "I'orcelana' (as he was
nicknamed) returned to Madrid. His identity papers indicated that he was the
repre.<:entative of the Paramount Film Co. However, liis true mission was service
of the (JPU. Duran was yi'fiitly successful in his activities due to the political
protection he enjoyed. He soon became one of tlie leading members of the
youths of the Communist Party, and greatly contributed to the merger of the
Connnunists youths with the youths of the Spanish Labor Party, thus giving
birth to the .ISC, of fateful remembrance, since this organization committed the
most cold-blooded crimes before July IS. liKUJ — that is the date of the military
uprising — and during the red revolution which ensued.
"During the republican regime (l!>31-oG) Duran continued practicing his — "
* * * [blanked out] * * *.
I might say this -was before the Spanish civil war, as Ave all know.
"Together with other 'close' friends of his and some young pro-Communist
poets, among whom Alberty was noted, Duran succeeded in becoming notorious.
All of them were his tools and all of them were made into active Com-
munists. In Duran's home located—" * * * [at blank] * * *, "such
meetings took place that the police had to interfere frequently, thus giving oc-
casion to complete his record as — " * * * [considerable blank space] * * *
"in the tiles of the General Directorate of Security. This record as — " * * *
[blank] * * * "was probably removed by his friend. Serrano Poncela. who
was the chief of tbe 'Red' police during the months of October and November
3936 in Madrid and political reporter of "Mundo Obrero' (a Communist news-
paper), and chief of the .TSS. Duran's release from his frequent imprisonments
for — " * * * [again a blank] * * * "conduct was due to his powerful
political protectors, who blindly obeyed orders from the Soviet political
police .
"T^pon the national uprising (beginning of civil war) Gustavo Duran took over
the nearest convent to his house, called 'las Siervas de Maria,' located at the old
Chamberi Plaza. He was there the 'responsable," or chief. He was afflicted there
with typhoid fever during the month of August 1936."
The next notation on the photostat is that five copies of this report
went to the Dist W Europe, one to the Spec Dist, one to DC/CG, five
to ONI, six to the State Department, and one to the FBI.
"The 'Causo General' (general judicial proceedings) has information about
the crimes perpetrated by the militia under the command of Duran's 'choca'
(illegal pri.son). He was one of the principal leaders of the popular militia
created by the Communists. He was a personal friend of Lister and Modesto
(commanders of red brigades, now Generals in the Russian Army) and soon
.became captain, major and lieutenant colonel of the 'Red' Army. He belonged to
the General staff of the 'Red' forces which directed the 'brilliant' withdrawals
of Talavera de la Reina, Maqueda, Toledo, etc.
''When the international brigades were brought into the Madrid and Aranju -z
fronts, Gustavo Duran formed part of the High Russian General Staff, with
bead(|Uarters at Tarancon and its vicinity, where they left sad and hideous
recollections.
"After Tarancon we (the Spanish Intelligence Service) lost track of Duran.
It api>ears that he went to Moscow with a delegation of male and female members
of the 'Red" Army. It appears that later he was for some time in Paris.
"And now he is in Washington as a collaborator of Spruille Braden. <'hief of
a Section of the State Department."
118 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
Then, the MA Comment: "A very reliable Spaniard who is anti-Franco in
sympathies but is middle of the road Republican and extremely pro-United
States and democratic in his views states that he knows personally that Duran
as commander officer of an international brigade in a small town not far from
Madrid ordered the execution of the town electrician and another man who was
a mason, neither of whom has committed any act for which they should have
suffered this execution.
"Wendell G. Johnson.
"Colonel, O. 8. C. Military Attache."
Senator Tydings. Shortly after tliat report reached the State De-
partment, the notation is that this man vohmtaril}^ resigned.
Senator McCarthy. This apparently reached the State Depart-
ment June 4, and October 4 he voluntarily — I think that word is im-
portant — he "voluntarily" resigned.
Senator Tydings. Won't you allow me to correct that ? The date of
the report, written in Spain, was June 4, not the date it was received
by the State Department — is that correct ?
Senator McCarthy. I assume it took a couple of days to get here,
more or less, so we will say June 6 or 7.
Now, on August 2, Senator Wherry wrote to the State Department,
to Secretary Byrnes, and I think this is especially significant, because
all of this material must have been in the files at the time the Secretary
indicated this man just had disappeared from public life.
AUGUST 2, in4fi.
The Honorable James F. Byrnes,
Secretary of State, Washington, D. C.
Dear Secretary: As a member of the Appropriations Committee, on April 18,
1946, I asked for investigation of certain persons holding positions of trust and
responsibility in your Department.
It was my purpose then and is now to withhold appropriations that finance the
salaries and activities of anyone in the State Department whose allegiance ap-
parently is to some other country than to the United States.
You will recall. Mr. Secretary, that when you appeared I questioned you about
some of these officials and among them was a Gustavo Duran. This was just
prior to the Carter Glass funeral. At that time you stated there was a question
of identity of Gustavo Duran,
That question no longer exists, since Intelligence procured the par-
ticular picture I gave the Chair.
You stated further an investigation had revealed that he was some other person
than the man in the State Department, who has been an assistant to Spruille
Braden.
It has now come to my knowledge there exists an extensive military intelligence
report on this man, Gustavo Duran, and I am reliably informed that several
copies of this report have been delivered to the State Department.
I am now making this formal request upon you in my official capacity as a
United States Senator, and as a member of the State Department Subcommittee
on Appropriations, that on the basis of this report you immediately dischai'ge
Gustavo Duran.
Cordially yours,
Senator Tydings. Have you got Secretary Byrnes' reply to that ?
Senator McCarthy. I have a reply to it but, as usual in correspond-
ence, you write to the Secretary, and someone else replies.
Senator Tydings. Will you read the reply ?
Senator McCarthy. The Chair knows I intend to read the reply,
because it is on the next page of the document.
Senator Tydings, I didn't see it.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVEtSTIGATION 119
Senator McCarthy. It is headed :
Assistant Secretary of State,
Washington, September IJf, WZ/G.
My Dear Sknatok: T ;iiu in loceipt of your recent inquiry about the security
investigation by the Department of ^Ir. Gustavo Duran. As you know, the De-
partment has a security committee which confines itself to reviewing security
investigations —
ill other words, the old Loyalty Board —
ami to making recommendations based thereon. Of course, this committee has
nothing to do with reviewing the qualifications or competency of the person
rt-vM'wed for ;i position in the Department other than as security is involved. I
have added this because from our conversation I would assume that you seriously
question the qualifications of Mr. Duran for employment, as distinguished from
security consideration. That phase of Mr. Duraus employment is not within
the scope of the security committee.
I want to call the committee's attention especially to the next para-
graph. This indicates that conditions have not changed much since
September 14, 1946, down to date. He says :
After reviewing the entire record on Mr. Duran as proc<u-ed from all avail-
able sources, the security committee recommended favorably on Mr. Duran.
I have carefully gone over the record before the security committee and I have
approved their recommendation.
While I recognize that the above conclusions are at variance with your own
feelings, I have to do my duty as I see it and I hope that you will recognize
that I have attempted to exercise my judgment faithfully and honestly.
With best wishes, I am
Sincerely yours,
And, it is sisrned "Donald Russell."
Senator Ttdixgs. Mr. Russell at that time — was he Under Secretary
of State?
Senator McCarthy. He was the predecessor of Mr. Peurifoy — ^held
the job now held by Mr. Peurifoy.
Senator Tydixgs. Do you know the title?
Senator McCarthy. 1 have difficulty in keeping track of the title.
I believe it was Assistant Secretary for Administration, or something
along that line. Anyway, he had the job Mr. Peurifoy now holds.
When Mr. Russall wrote this letter on September 4, 1946, he had in
Ids files the top-secret report from the militar}^ attache in Madrid,
which I have already referred to, outlining in detail the facts I have
given on Duran.
Now what was the mysterious power in the possession of Duran
that enabled him to continue to serve as a confidential assistant to
Spruille Braden, the then head of the State Department's South
American affairs?
Why was this man permitted voluntarily to resign in the face of
these grave charges?
And, I might add, who has gotten him the important task of going
to the UN, and doing the job of screening refugees coming into this
Nation ?
Senator Tydings. Senator McCarthy, I would like to say that your
inquiry that we should find out who got him the job in the United
Nations, inasmuch as there is no evidence in what we are reading here,
will be a part of our inquiry. We don't know who he is, whether
innocent or guilty, but we Avill find out anyway.
68970 — 50 — pt. 1 9
120 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
Senator McCarthy. I don't have documentary evidence, but we
will be able to help your staff very considerably, as to who recom-
mends these individuals to UN, and who gets them their jobs.
Mr. Duran obviously had powerful friends, and one of his greatest
champions was his immediate chief, Spruille Braden.
I now show the committee exhibit ^3, which is a copy of a letter
marked "secret"' and dated December 21, 1942, in Habana.
I believe the chairman has this exhibit before him, which reads
as follows :
Habana, December 21, 19JfS.
Monorayiduoi for the Militarji Attache:
Mr. Gustavvi Duran wa.s recommenced, to me in the first instance by a friend
of nnimpeachaole patriotism and integrity. He was recommended for a specific
objective requiring a person of higlUy specialized qualificatiftns; his duties were
to be concerned with protecting United States intei-ests thrcmgh confidential
.surveillance over Falangist activities in Culia.
As to Mr. Duran's background, he is a naturalized American citizen born and
educated in Spain.
Incidentally, his naturalization was one of the most rapid I ever
heard of — as I recall it took about 6 weeks.
He is of good family, and in his youth was particularly interested in the arts.
When the Spanish civil war began in July 1936 he gave up everything to fight
on the side of the Loyalists and from a somewhat dilettante Init l)rilliant young
man, turned into a vital force for the Republican cause. His military record
was reportedly brilliant. He was further dest-ribed to me as l)eing a man whose
liatred for the Fascists, and his deep devotion to lii»eral principles, are not
open to debate.
This is Spruille Braden speaking, you understand,
A close association with him during a period of over a year fully supports this
description.
Mr. Duran arrived in Habana in November 1942 on the payroll of the Pan
American Union and was to transfer to the staff of the CIAA on February 1,
1043. Instead, I urgently I'ecommended his employment as an auxiliary Foreign
Service officer in a telegram from which I quote the following:
"I regard Duran as eminently qualified for the work he is performing and
I have the highest estimation for his intelligence and character as well as for
his complete loyalty and discretion. He has already proven of very great value
to this Embassy and I anticipate that his usefulness will inci-ease as he becomes
more familiar with conditions in Cuba. I consider that his continuance here is
liarticularly desirable at the present time when our relations with Spain are
of such vital importance."
Mr. Duran has now served as one of my immediate associates for more than
a year. His work has been excellent and outstandingly u.seful to the T'nited
States Government. From my personal knowledge based on close association,
Mr. Duran is not a Conmmnist but a liberal of the highest tyi)e. I consider him
an unusually worthy, patriotic, and honorable American citizen, who shows
great promise as a United States Government official capable of high resiionsibility.
Spkuili.e Braden.
This was w^-itten. Mr. Chairman, at the time, you understand, that
Duran, of Spanish fame, was not the Duran of State Department
fame, but that claim has long since been dropped.
Senator Tydixgs. The date of the connnunication you have just
read was December 21, 1943.
Senator McCarthy. That is exactly as I read it, December 21. 1943,
Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Braden describes Mr. Duran as one recoiameiided to him Ijv a
friend of unimpeachable integrity.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY IXVElSTIGATION 121
He set forth in his letter that Diiran was a naturalized citizen, bom
and educated in Spain, of good family and in his youth was particu-
larly interested in the arts. Braden said that from 11);^>G Duran gave
up everything to fight on the side of the Spanish Loyalists and said he
urgently recommended his empknnient as an auxiliary Foreign Service
officer.
Incidentally, not that this is important, but Duran was mistaken
in where he was born. He was born in the Canary Islands, according
to the Intelligence reports.
Xow with that information in the possession of the then Secretary
of State, information which Braden gave, plus the claim that this was
not the same Duran, I can understand why the then Secretary kept
liim on. That was before the intelligence report was made available to^
the Secretarj^ of State.
Following Senator "Wherry's letter to the State Department of
August 194G, in which the Senator maintained that this man was such
a bad security risk that he should be discharged, we find that he was
])ermitted to resign on October 4, 1946.
In view of the grave charges made by Senator Wherry and the
unusual attitude of the State Department in permitting this man's
resignation, plus all the information the committee will have before
it. it Avoukt be interesting to know what, if any, investigation was
made by State Department officials as to his conduct while in a
lesponsible, confidential capacity in the Department.
But Duran's frieiids in the State Department did not turn their
backs on him.
After his resignation. Duran almost immediately was employed as
a representative of the International Refugee Organization of the
United Nations. He was employed there as of yesterday.
I believe I have explained that this is not his title, according to the
State Department. Tryg\'e Lie's secretary says he cannot tell me what.
he is doing, but we sent a man over there to physically check, and try
and find out, and he reports that his work has to do with the screening
of refugees.
Senator Greex. May I ask a question?
Senator ^McCarthy. Yes.
Senator Green. Can vou explain Avhv Mr. Braden did not sign this
letter of December 2.3, 1943?
Senator McCarthy. There is no part of Mr. Braden's actions that
I would even attempt to explain. Senator.
Senator Greex. All right.
Senator Htckexlooper. Mr. Chairman, this exhibit, as I under-
stand it. is not in the form of a letter. It is in the form of a memoran-
dum for the military attache, or rather, from the military attache.
Senator McCarthy. It is a photostat of the memorandum which is
in the Department file.
Senator Tydixgs. The signature is typed in; is that your point?'
Senator McCarthy. If the Senator wants to get the original, he
can get it where I cannot. I assume that would be in order.
Senator Tydixgs. Well, we will get it.
Senator McCarthy. I have received a confidential report tluit
Duran was recommended for his UX position by a member of the
present Presidential Cabinet. It has also been, reported to. me that
122 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVEBTIGATION
Diiran is the brother-in-law of Michael Straight, the owner and pub-
lisher of a pro-Communist magazine called the New Republic.
Here again it is certainly pertinent to inquire where this man got
his power, what he did while in the State Department and, possibly,
of equal importance, is what he did not do.
To complete this picture, I attach hereto copies of the following
documents :
Senator Tydings. Has the New Republic been declared by any or-
ganization as a Communist-front newspaper. Senator McCarthy ?
Senator McCarthy. I did not say "Communist front," Mr. Chair-
man. It is not necessary for the Chair to put words in my mouth. If
he will read the top of page 13
Senator Tydings. I did not read it, but I want to know who de-
nominates it as pro-Communist magazine.
Senator McCarthy. I have just named them that. If the chairman
will read it, I think he will agree
Senator Tydings. I do not have the time to read it.
Senator McCarthy. I do not recommend it necessarily for reading.
Now, the exhibit numbered 34, Mr. Chairman
Senator Hickenlooper. Is that the one denominated 1 ?
Senator McCarthy. This is the report from Edward J. Rutf , assist-
ant United States military attache in the Dominican Republic, ad-
dressed to the American Intelligence Service dated December 30, 1943.
I have a note here, that the date of this is December 30, 1943. I do
not find any date on this document, however. I assume that that is
the correct date.
The second page of the letter, I do not have the first page either —
the first part may not be too valuable, Mr. Chairman. It is not clear
who Ruff is referring to.
It is marked "Secret copy," and says :
He states, dogmatically, that the records showed Duraii to be a nieralier of
the Spanish Comimmist Party. Our source had previously made available to
xis the information agreeing vpith that sent to us by military attach^, Habana,
except the statement that Duran entered the Army as a private. According to
our agent, Durun was commissioned directly from civilian life and given the rank
of major in the militia. Later when the militia became part of the Spanish Re-
publican Army, he was made a major in the army. The only additional informa-
tion we had, and which we did not mention in the report, as it was not believed
pertinent, was the reported fact that Duran is a homosexual. I do not question
Duran's interest in the arts, his culture, or intelligence. However, we only stated
in our report that Duran was a member of the Communist Party, and that we
(lid not know whether he is still a member of the Communist Party. I, myself,
am convinced that Duran was a Communist and consider Ambassador Braden's
statement that he is a ''liberal of the highest type" to be a euphemism. Under
the circumstances, I believed the reliability of our report still remains as origi-
nally submitted.
The Ambassador here is inclined to concur in my report on Duran, but has
asked that no further official correspondence on the subject be sent up. Hence
this personal letter from me.
I want to repeat that, Mr. Chairman :
The Ambassador here is inclined to concur in my report on Duran, but has
asked that no further official correspondence on the subject he sent up. Hence
this personal letter from me.
Senator Tydings. Just a minute, Senator McCarthy.
Senator McCarthy. I might say the entire letter — the first half I
<lid not read, and it might be well to I'ead that into the record, also,
STATE DEPARTMEIS^T EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVEISTIGATION 123
ami w ith the permission of the Chair I would like to read the first half
of that letter.
Senator Tyoings. All rio;ht.
Senator McCarthy. I read the last half from the j^hotostatic copy.
I do not have a photostat of the first. Here is the first half :
I want to take this opportunity to clarify my position in connection witli Re-
port No. 4'JS, dated December 18. l!)4:i, sub.iect : Gustavo Duran, alleged Com-
munist employee of the CIAA, Habana. As you know, this office received a cable
from th(^ military attach^, Habana, requesting that dissemination of this report
to be held up on the grounds that it was '"absolutely incorrect." A few days ago
we received letter No. 7967 from Lieutenant Colonel Brown, written by Ambas-
sador r.raden concerning this individual. Both these communications corrobo-
rated information which we had regarding Duran and I cannot see on the basis
of their reports how our report can be branded as "absolutely incorrect." Our
only statement in the report on Dui'an is that he was a member of the Commu-
nist I'arty in Spain. From further reports received, this information can now be
evaluated as A-1. For your own knowledge, the information on Duran was sub-
mitted iiy a Spanish refugee who also served on Duran's promotion board in
Spain, which board was charged with considering recommendations for promo-
tion of Spanish Republican officers. As our source was actually sitting on the
board at the time that Duran's I'ecommendation for promotion came through,
he himself saw all Duran's papers and letters of recommendation, and had
access to complete information regarding Duran's background.
I next submit to the Chair an excerpt from the book. Why and How
I Left Defense Ministry in the Intriijue of Russia in Spain, by Indali-
cio Prieto, former Minister of Defense for the Spanish Republican
cause.
Senator Tydings. Is that the next page?
Senator McCarthy. I have the original document, if the Chair
cares for it.
Senator Tydings. I want to follow you.
Senator McCarthy. I hope the committee will keep in mind that
this is the same Duran who is apparently presently screening our
DP's.
It is true that I have had certain Incidents with the Russians. Certain Rus-
sian technicians proposed to me in Valencia that a service of military investiga-
tions should be created. This was the Spanish counterpart of the NKVD. I
confess that I opposed the project. But because of insistent pressure, I created
the SIM.
The SIM, I believe the committee knows, is the counterpart of the
Russian NKVD.
I was especially concerned with choosing a chief, until I gave it to an intimate
friend of mine, who had just come from France, wliere he was with his family.
In entrusting him with the task. I gave him these insti'uctions :
"You are going to form the SIM, carefully, with elements of all groups of the
Popular Front. Your only charges will be these two: Do not permit the new
organization to be converted into an instrument of the Communists and do not
permit Russian technicians to gain control. Listen to the advice of these tech-
nicians and follow their orientations, whicli can be very useful to you, but con-
trol must always be in your hands and in that of the Government, and of no
one else."
I .showed little tact in the selection of that comrade. A Republican named
Sayagues came in fact to be the chief of SIM. Regional chiefs of the SIM
were designated and they proposed to me a certain Gustavo Duran for the
Madrid zone. It was not conv:>ale(i from me that the person proposed was a
Communist. I knew this, but in spite of that, he was appointed by decree which
I myself drew up. becau.se I did not wish to follow in a slavish manner the
project which was handed to me — there is an article by virtue of which the
appointment of all agents of the SIM rests exclusively' with the Minister of
124 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
National Defense. This was a guarantee which temporarily I wish to establish.
No one could be an agent of the SIM who was not in possession of the memoran-
dum book wliich bore duplicate the signature of the minister. Duran having
been appointed chief of the demarcation of the army of the center, of his own
acctn-d and without power to do so. appointed the agents who were under his
orders, which to the number of some hundreds, were Communists and only four
or five were Socialists.
As the Chair will recall, this was at the time Spain was trying to
Avork out her difficulties by having a coalition government of Socialists,
Connnnnists, and so forth.
I faced an intolerable situation, wherefore alleging, and with reason, that I
lacked commanders in the army. I ordered that all military chiefs who were
xiot in particular positions in the army should return to their former positions,
and thus Major Duran liad to return to his military fun( tion. Because of
Dtiran's leaving the SIM, I received a visit from a Russian technician, of these
services, who said to me :
■Russian Agent. I have come to speak to you about the dismissal of Duran.
What happened?
"Prieto. Nothing special I lacked commanders in the army and ordered Duran
to return to it.
"RiTsstAN Agent. Xo. You discharged him because he appointed Communists
as agents in Madrid.
'•Prieto. That is also sufficient reason, becau.se Duran absolutely lacked au-
Ihoiity to make appoiutmeuts.
"Russian Agent. Why did he not have the power to appoint agents?
"PuiETO. Because by virtue of the decree creating the SIM that power is
ireserved exclusively to the Minister."
Still quoting :
I read the decree and before the evidence of my statement my visitor alleged:
"Russian Agent. Duran could m.-ike temporary appointments.
"Prieto. Neither actual nor temporary. Hei"e in Spain, moreover, the tempor-
ary is converted into the definitive.
"Russian Agent. Be that as it may. I come to ask ycm to immediately restore
3Ia.ior Duran as chief of the SIM in Madrid.
■'Peieto. I am very sorry, l)Ut I cannot consent.
■"Russian Agent. If you do not consent to restore Duran, my relations with
you are broken.
"Prieto. I am sorry, but Major Duran will go to the front of his division and
will not return to the SIM. Your attitude is unjustified and I cannot yield to
it."
I did not yield as a matter of fact, and my relations with the Russian technician,
thi'ough his own wish, were absolutely cut off. I have not seen him since that
scene.
Incidentally, the Chair questioned my description of the magazine
New Republic.
Senator Tydixgs. I did not question it, I asked what information
you had to support your allegation.
Senator McCarthy. If I may finish, I want to call attention to the
fact that Mr. Wallace was for a time the editor of that paper, and
the Chair may not think he is ])ro-Connnunist. I think he is, and as
far as I know the magazine has not changed its policy in the slightest
since Wallace left, in fact it almost seemed that Wallace was a stabiliz-
ing influence on that paper, if anyone could call Wallace that in any-
thing.
I believe, Mr. Chairman, that covers exhibits in the Duran case.
Senator Tydings. The confidential exhibits furnished by the wit
nesses will be held by the connnittee until the whole connnittee author
izes in whole or in part their release.
Senator McCarthy. I am going to give the chairman another photo
stat — I think that had better be given later to the committee staff.
STATE DEPARTAIEXT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 125
Mr, Chairman, while out making some Lincohi Day si^eeches, I also
mentioned another name which has been shrugged off by the State
-Department. I wouUl like to read what T said about this individual,
very briefly.
Senator Gkeex. May I ask a question ?
Senator Tydings. Senator Green w^onld like to ask a question.
Senator Grkex. In that connection, Senator, would you like to put
into the record all your speeches on this subject?
Senator ]McCartiiy. If the Senator wants my speeches, he most cer-
tainly can have them.
Seiiator Tydixgs. Will you i)ut in both the written speeches and the
oral speeches, because as I recall your testimony, you stated on the
floor that you spoke without notes out at Wheeling, at least.
Senator McCarthy. Not at Wheeling, at Reno, Nev.
Senator Tydixgs. Well, at Keno; and. we would like to have both
the written speech and the oral speech.
Senator McCarthy. I am glad to know the Chair is so interested in
my speeches. I will give him a complete file I have made.
Senator Tydixgs. The Chair is interested in everything you have
to say about this hearing, from the time it started until it ends.
Senator McCarthy. Here is what was said about this man Harlow
Shapley.
I said you will recall last spring there was held in New York what
was known as a World Peace Conference
Senator Tytjings. Do you have copies of this ?
Senator McCxVEthy. I am reading from the Congressional Record.
This conference was labeled by the State Department, and Mr. Tru-
man, as a sounding board of Communist propaganda and a front for
Russia. Mr. Harlow Shapley was a chairman of that conference. In-
terestingly enough, according to a news release put out by the State
Department in July, the Secretary of State appointed Shapley on a
commission which acts as liaison with UNESCO and the State De-
partment.
After I made my Lincoln Day speech, the State Department,
through its Under Secretary John Peurifoy, had this to say in his press
release of February 13, 1950, concerning Dr. Shapley :
Di-. Shapley has never been an employee of the Department of State. How-
ever, in 104"), he served as a nienib'r of the Amerie:in dolesation at the UNESCO
Conference in London ; and in 11!46 to the International Astronomical Union at
Copenhagen.
Dr. Shapley is a member of the National Commission for UNESCO, repre-
senting the American Association for the Advancement of Science.
I submit that this statement in Mr. Peurifov's press release is a mis-
representation of the true facts concerning Dr. Shapley's association
with our Department of State.
Keep in mind, this is the man who headed the peace conference
which the Secretary labeled as a sounding board for Russia.
Senator Tydixos, Senator McCarthy, my two colleagues are asking
me questions which I will attempt to clear up.
Is this one of the cases you outlined on the Senate floor by number?
Senator McCarthy. No; this is one of the men I mentioned in
talking, one that the Secretary had referred to in a news release, and
I assure the Chair that whenever I refer to one of those cases men-
tioned on the Senate floor, I will give him the number.
126 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
The full facts concerninfy Dr. Shapley and the facts that the State
Department's press release conveniently omitted are these:
Dr. Shapley was appointed to the National Commission for
UNESCO by the Secretary of State in May 1947 to fill an unexpired
term, and he was reappointed to that position by the Secretary of
State in June 1947 for a second term on the Commission, which expires
in April of this year.
Not only was Dr. Shapley twice appointed to the National Com-
mission by the predecessor of the present Secretary of State, in
accordance with the provisions of Public Law 565 of the Seventy-
ninth Congress, but his transportation expenses and $10 per diem are
also paid by the State Department, in accordance with the provisions
of Public Law 565.
I am at a complete loss to understand how the State Department
could seek to avoid responsibility for Dr. Shapley's appointment and
continuance on the National Commission, in view of these uncon-
troverted facts.
As a matter of fact,'! know that John Peurifoy had all of these
facts in his possession concerning the appointment and payment of
expenses for Dr. Shapley at the National Commission at the time his
misleading press release of February 13 was issued to the public.
I know that because I have a letter from John Peurifoy, dated Feb-
ruary 16, 1950, in which he furnished me with the facts concerning
Shapley's appointments and compensation, in accordance with Public
Law 565.
Now I personally do not blame John Peurifoy for attempting to
mislead the public and whitewash the State Department in that press
release. I have known Peurifoy to be an upright, honest individual,
and I for one am convinced that he is issuing these misleading half
truths to the American public on orders from higher ups.
It is inconceivable that the Secretary of State should be condemning
the Communist-inspired Scientific and Cultural Conference for World
Peace on the one hand, and retaining Dr. Harlow Shapley, one of
its main organizers, in an important position with UNESCO, on the
other.
As this committee well knows, the power to appoint carries with it
the power to dismiss unless definite restrictions are placed on the
appointing authority, which they are not in the case of Dr. Shapley.
Furthermore, inasmuch as State Department funds are being used to
pay the traveling expenses and per diem of Dr. Shapley's at the
National Commission, there is no reason why he could not be sum-
marily dismissed from that position by Secretary Acheson under the
broad powers of the so-called McCarran rider.
Dr. Shapley's active participation in the Soviet Peace Conference
is not the last nor only Communist-front with which this man has
been affiliated. His record with Communist fronts is a long and
interesting one.
Now, I have here, Mr. Chairman, I do not want to take the com-
mittee's time to dwell on each one, in view of the fact that the Secretary
himself has said this man headed an outfit which was a sounding board
of Communism, but I have here in my hand, a list of some 36 Com-
munist-front organizations which this individual has belonged to,
and if the Chair's staff is interested
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 127
Senator Tydixgs. Tliey ^vill bo ])rinted in the record at this point.
Senator McCarthy. I will be glad to give them to him.
1. Joint Aiiti-Fascist Refugee Committee, sponsor (letterhead dated September
8. 1044) (also letterhead of April 2S, 1040) .
2. Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee ("onuuittre, eliairnian. reception committee for
Irene Joliot-Curie, a leading French Conuuunist fronter and wife of
Fredericlv Joliot-Curie, top-ranking French Conununist Party member
(invitation to the dinner, March ;U, 1948).
3. Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee, speaker (the Worker, October 31,
1047).
4. Fraternal Outlook, official ori:an of the International Workers Order, inter-
view, March 1042. p. 12.
5. Natiomxl Federation for Constitutional Liberties, Signer of Statement on
i.ssuance of commissions to Communists (Daily Worker, March 18, 104.5).
6. Progressive Citizens of America, attack on motion picture industry for firing
Communists (Daily Worker, November 26, 1047).
7. Progressive Citizens of America, vice chairman (PCA Politics, October 1047).
8. Progressive Citizens of America, chairman, cultural freedom conference
(Daily Worker, October 27, 1047).
9. Progressive Citizens of America, honorary chairman, Massachusetts chapter
(the Progressive Citizen, March 1947).
10. Progressive Citizens of America, Conference on Thought Control in the
IL S. A. (pamphlet. 1947).
11. Progressive Citizens of America, delegate, national convention (release of
list of delegates, 1948).
12. Progressive Citizens of America, speaker on behalf of Hollywood Communists
(dinner pi-ogram, March 1948).
13. National Conuuittee to Defeat the Mundt Bill (pamphlet: Hey, Brother,
There's a Law Against You) (also release dated June 1.5, 1040).
14. League of American Writers, signer of open letter (Daily Worker, July 31,
1040).
15. Independent Citizens Committee of the Arts, Sciences, and Professions,
vice chairman (letterhead. May 1046).
16. Independent Citizens Committee of the Arts, Sciences, and Professions,
initiating sponsor (Daily Woi'ker, December 24, 1944).
Ma}'^ I call attention to the fact that most of the organizations with
which Harlow Shapley has been associated get their pnblicity ex-
chisivelv in the Dailv Worker, the official organ of the Communist
Party.
17. Congress of American Women, an affiliate of the Soviet-controlled Women's
International Democratic Federation, speaker (Daily Worker, September
2.3, 1047).
18. American Committee for Democracy and Intellectual Freedom, member,
national committee (letterhead, September 22, 1939).
19. Signer of statement defending," Isadore Rubin, Communist writer (Daily
Worker, January 16, 1948).
20. Teachers Union, speaker (New York Times, April 18, 1949).
I might point ont that this organization has been cited as Communist
by a number of witnesses before the Senate Committee on the
Judiciary,
21. New York Conference for Inalienable Rights, signer of open telegram
(Daily Worker. September 17, 1040).
22. United Public Workers — an organization which was thrown out of the
CIO for being Communist — speaker (Daily Worker, April 16, 1948).
23. Bill of Rights Ccmference of the Civil Rights Congress, sponsor (Daily
Worker, June 17. 1040).
24. Council for I'an American Democracy, open letter defending Luiz Carlos
Prestes, leading Brazilian Communist Party official (New Masses, De-
cember 3, 1940).
25. National Emergency Conference for Democratic Rights, signer of open letter
(Daily Worker, May 13, 1940).
26. New Masses, official Conuuunist periodical, signer of oi>en letter (New
Masses, April 2, 1940) .
128 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
27. Spanish Refugee Appeal, national sponsor (letterhead dated February 26,
1946).
28. Conference Asainst Anti-Communist Legislation, speaker (Washington
Times-Herald, April 28, 1948).
29. Citizens United to Abolish the Wood-Rankin Conmiittee, supporter (New
York Times, March 14, 1946, paid advertisement).
30. American Russian Institute, speaker (Daily Worker, May 20, 1947).
31. American Russian Institute, member, board of trustees (New York Times,,
December 12, 1947).
32. Statement in defense of Gerhard Eisler (Daily Worker, June 28, 1947).
Eisler is, of course, the notorious International Communist agent
who escaped on the Polish liner Batory last year. Incidentally, the
affection between these two was mutual, because Eisler spoke in praise
of Harlow Shapley in a piece entitled "My Side of the Story," page 6.
33. Conference on Cultural Freedom and Civil Liberties (PCA Politics, October
1947).
34. Committee of One Thousand, sponsor (press release, March 5, 1948).
3ii. Attack on United States P'oreign Policy in Greece (New York Times, Septem-
ber 10, 1947).
36". Committee for the First Amendment (pamphlet, p. 5).
Mr. Chairman, in their recent testimony before the Senate Appro-
priations Committee, both Mr. Acheson and Mr. Peurifoy stated that
homosexuals are regarded as poor security risks. These State De-
partment officials pointed out in that testimony that some 91 homo-
sexuals, whom they considered to be people of moral weaknesses, were
asked to resign from the Department.
I agree, and I am sure that no one here will disagree, with the official
position of the State Department; namely, that homosexuals are poor
security risks.
Senator Tydings. Just a minute.
We will have a little less confusion in the chamber, please, a little
less noise.
Proceed, Senator.
Senator McCarthy. The case I will now discuss involves a man who
is not only reported to be a homosexual, but he was arrested for sexual
perversion.
Because of the sordid details of this case — and until the committee
has had ample opportunity to investigate the matter — I will not make
public the name of this man, but I will give to the connnittee the full
details concerning this case, including the name of the individual in-
volved, for their executive consideration.
This individual was employed in the Foreign Service and the State
Department until 1948 when he resigned for reasons unknown to me.
I had received information from several sources that this man
was a notorious homosexual. A check of the records of the Metropoli-
tan Police Department indicated that these reports were true. I now
hand the Chair, for your executive consideration, a copy of a police
report, together with a police photograph and the official biography
of this individual as it appeared in the State Department Register
of April, 1948.
I suggest that not be displayed.
Senator Tydings. The Chair will hold it until after the hearing,
and then we will have a short executive session if necessary.
The first name here is the last name, is it not, on that biography yoM
liave just given us?
Senator McCarthy. Let me look at the copy.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY IX\E!STIGAT10N 129
Senator Tydings. The lirst name?
Senator McCarthy. The first name is the hist name.
All of this material, as I said, is being given for your executive con-
sideration, as I do not desire to make his name public at this time for
the reason stated above.
You will note from the police records that this man was arrested
on September 8, 1943. The charge was sexual perversion and the
police report states that he was known to hang out at the men's room,
at Lafayette Park in AVashington.
This man is getting about $i*2.U00 a year now.
He was chaiged with disorderly conduct in connection with his per-
verted activities. I do not have the record of the disposition of this
case available, but I am informed that he was required to post col-
lateral of $25 on this charge and forfeited collateral.
As I ])reviously said, this man resigned from the State Depart-
ment in 1U48 and shortl}- thereafter became employed in one of the
most sensitive agencies of our Government where he now holds an
important and high-paying position. I am prepared to furnish the
name of that agency for the executive consideration of this com-
mittee.
Senator Tydixgs. Seiuitor McCarthy, you say it is one of the most
sensitive agencies of ours ? Is it the State Department ?
Senator McCarthy. It is the CIA.
Senator Tydixgs. He was in the State Department?
Senator McCarthy. He was in the State Department, in 1948, and
went from there to the CIA, that is the Central Intelligence Agency.
Senator Tydixgs. It is not under the State Department at the
present time, is it ?
Senator McCarthy. Let us make this clear, so the wrong man will
not be suspected : He is not one of the main officials in the CIA.
Senator Tydixgs. I understand that : but he was in the State De-
partment, according to your testimony?
Senator McCarthy. That is right.
Senator Tydixgs. He is not now in the State Department, but is over
working in the CIA ?
Senator McCarthy. That is right, and at a salary of somewhere
around ten or twelve thousand dolhirs a year, as I recall.
Furthermore, I have been informed that the files of the State Depart-
ment and other investigative departments of the Government contain
these and other facts concerning the homosexuality of this Federal
employee.
In view of this man's criminal record, which I have just presented
to the committee, and other information concerning his lack of moral
fitness, I am at a loss to understand why he was allowed to resign
from the State Department. I might say, in connection with that,
it seems unusual to me, in that we have so many normal people, so
many competent Americans, that we must employ so numy very,
very unusual men in Washington. It certainly gives the country an
odd idea of the type of individuals who are running things down here.
Again refeiring to ]Slr. Peurifoy's recent testimony before the Senate
A])propriations Committee. I wish to point out that Mr. Peurifoy
infoi'med that committee that he has experienced difficulty in having
security risks fired from the De])artment. In his testimony, Mr. Peuri-
foy said that at one point he reconnnended the dismissal of 10 poor
130 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
security risks from the Department under the provisions of the Mo-
Carran rider but that his recommendations were overruled and only
one of these men was fired.
He did state, I believe, the other nine were allowed to resign, I assume
so they could take over some other Government jobs.
As I said earlier in this statement, I do not know why the indi-
vidual who is the subject of my present case was allowed to resign;
but I think it is the responsibility of this committee to find out the
full facts concerning his resignation.
I also believe that the committee should immediately determine how
this individual was able to stay in the Department for almost 5 years
after he was arrested on a morals charge in Washington, D, C. I
also think the committee should find out how he, after leaving the
State Department, was able to get a top-salaried, important position
in another sensitive Government agency. It should be of considerable
interest to this committee to find out who sponsored this individual
or who intervened in his behalf in both the State Department and
his present place of employment.
I feel that this case is of sufficient importance for the committee to
take immediate action.
Would the Chair like to wait until they bring the copies for the
members of the committee, for the next case, or shall I proceed?
Senator Tydixgs. How long will it be, Senator?
Senator McCarthy. About a minute.
Senator Tydixgs. We will wait.
(There was a short pause.)
Senator McCarthy. JNIr. Chairman, before these are handed to the
press, I ask that these documents be marked "Exhibit 35."
Senator Tymngs. All right, Senator, proceed.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman, this is one of those so-called old
cases, but it is very new in some respects. We find in this case, and the
Chair's staff should check on this immediately — in this case you will
find that the State Department's loyalty board has again picked up this
case very recently, and again they have given a clean bill of health to
this individual.
However, a week ago last Friday, the Civil Service Commission's
appeals loyalty board, in this particular case, made what is known as
a post-audit. In that post-audit the case w^as sent back to the State
Department loyalty board, not only with the statement that they were
dissatisfied with the results but with the recommendation that the State
Department loyalty board that sat upon that case not be allowed to sit
upon it again, but that a new board be convened.
So, I want to make it clear, when I talk about this man's danger as a
security risk, that the Civil Service Commission has, as reecntly as a
week ago last Friday, rather wholeheartedly agreed, and went so far as
to say "We think you should have a different loyalty board sitting on
this case next time.''
This case is that of John Stewart Service.
This man is a Foreign Service officer of the Department of State and
at the moment is in Calcutta, India, where he is helping determine the
all-important policy of our Government toward India.
The name of John Stewart Servi(^e is not new to the men in the Gov-
ernment who nnist pass on a governmental employee's fitness as a se-
curity risk.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVEISTIGATION 131
When Mr. Penrifoy testified before the Senate Appropriations Com-
mittee, he said that Service had been cleared four different times.
It is my nnderstandinji that the mnnbei- lias now risen to five and I
earnestly request that this committee ascei'tain immediately if Service
Mas not considered as a bad security risk by the loyalty appeal board
of the Civil Service Commission, in a post-audit decision, handed down
on March 3 of this year.
I understand that this Board returned the file of Mr. Service to the
State Department with the report that they did not feel that they
could give him clearance and requested that a new board be appointed
for the consideration of this case.
To indicate to the committee tlie im])ortance of this man's position
as a security risk to the Government. I think it should be noted that he
is one of the dozen top policy makers in the entire Department of State
on far-eastern policy.
He is one of the small, potent group of "untouchables" who year after
year formulate and carry out the plans for the Department of State
and its dealings with foreign nations; particularlv, those in the Far-
East.
The Communist affiliations of Service are well known.
His background is crystal clear.
He was a friend and associate of Frederick Vanderbilt Field, the
Communist chairman of the editorial board of the infamous
Amerasia.
Half of the editorial board of this magazine were pro-Communist
members of the State Department and the committee is in possession
of these names.
On June 6, 1945. the Federal Bureau of Investigation, after an ex-
ceedingly painstakino- and careful investigation covering months, ar-
rested Philip J. Jaffe, Kate Louise Mitchell, editor and coeditor of
Amerasia : Andrew Eoth, a lieutenant in the United States Naval Re-
serve stationed in Washington : Emmanuel Sigurd Larsen ; and John
Stewart Service, who were employees of the State Department — this is
the same John S. Service to whom I have just referred and wdio is pres-
ently representing the State Department in Calcutta, India; also
Mark Julius Gayn, a magazine writer of New York City, who is about
to leave for Russia.
I might say, Mr. Chairman, that while I believe some of the mem-
bers of the committee may be fully aware of the chronological record,
I think it is important that I put iii all the details for the record.
Senator Tydings. All right, go ahead.
Senator McCarthy. They were arrested on charges of espionage in
connection with the theft of the following Government records :
Classified documents from the State Department, including some top
secret and confidential classification 360
Prepared by ONI 163
Prepared liy MID 42
Prepared by OWI 53
From the files of the War Department 9
Now, some of the important documents picked np by the FBI at the
time of the arrest were as follows, and I call this to the committee^s
attention.
First: One document marked "secret" and obviouslv originating m
the Navy Department dealt with the schedule and targets for the bomb-
132 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY USTS'-EISTIGATTON
ing of Japan. This particular document was known to be in the pos-
session of Philip Jaffe, one of the defendants, during the early spring
of 1945 and before the program had been effected. Tliat information
in the hands of our enemies could have cost us many precious Ameri-
can lives.
Second : Another document, also marked "top secret" and likewise
originating in the Navy Department, dealt with the disposition of
the Japanese Fleet subsequent to the major naval battle of October
1944, and gave the location and class of each Japanese warship. What
€onceivable reason or excuse could there be for these people, or anyone
else without authority, to have that information in their possession
and at the same time claim they are entitled to it because of freedom
of the press? That was the excuse they offered. They stole this docu-
ment for no good purpose.
Third : Another document stolen from the Office of Postal and Tele-
graph Censorship was a secret report on the Far East and so stamped
as to leave no doubt in anybody's mind that the mere possession of it
by an unauthorized person was a clear violation of the Espionage Act,
This was not an antiquated paper but of current and vital interest to
our Government and the Nation's welfare.
Fourth : Another document stolen was from the Office of Military
Intelligence and consisted of 22 pages containing information obtained
irom Japanese prisoners of war.
Fifth : Another stolen document, particularly illuminating and of
present great importance to our policy in China, was a lengthy detailed
report showing complete disposition of the units in the army of
Chiang Kai-shek, where located, how placed, under whose command,
naming the units, division by division, and showing their military
strength.
Many of the stolen documents bear an imprint which reads as
follows :
This document contains information aftVctinii' tlie national dofense of tlie
United States within the meaning of the Espionage Act, 50 United States Code
31-32, as amended. Its transmission or the revelation of its contents in any
manner to an unauthorized person is prohihited by law.
Despite the very small circulation of approximately 1,700 copies of
this magazine it had a large photo-copying department. According
to Congressman Dondero, who sjionsored the resolution for the inves-
tigation of the grand jury, this department was working through the
Flight, into the small hours of morning, and even on Sundays. It
could reproduce the stolen documents — and undoubtedly did — and
distribute them into channels to serve subversive purposes, even into
the clenched fists raised to destroy our Government.
In June 1944, Amerasia commenced attacks upon Joseph C. Grew,
who had during his stay in the State Department rather vigorously
o])posed the clique which favored scuttling Chiang Kai-shek and al-
lowing the Communist element in China to take over,
Larsen, one of the codefendants in this case, subsequently wrote a
lengthy report on this matter. I would like to quote briefly from parts
of that report.
Here is his quote :
Behind the now-famous State Department espionage case, involving the arrest
of six persons of whom T was one. an arrest which shocked the Nation on June 7,
1945, is the story of a highly organized campaign to switch American policy in
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 133
the Far East from its long-established course to the Soviet line. It is a story
which has never been told before in full. Many sensational, though little ex-
plained, developments such as the General Htilwell affair, the resignation of
Undersecretary Joseph C. Grew and Ambassador Patricli Hurley and the emer-
gence of a pro-Soviet bloc in the Far Eastern Division of the State Department,
are interlaced with the case of the six, as the episode became known. * * *
It is the mysterious whitewash of the chief actors of the espionage case which
the Congress has directed to the Hobbs committee to investigate. But from be-
liiiid that whitewasli tliere emerges tiie pattern of a major operation i)erformed
upon Uncle Sam witliout his being conscious of it. That oiteration vitally affects
our main ramparts in the Pacific. In consequence of this operation General
Marshall was sent on a foredoomed mission to China designed to promote Soviet
expansion on our Asiatic frontier. It was a mission which could not but come
to grief and whicli may yet bring untold sorrow to the American people.
Senator Tydixgs. Senator McCarthy, the report from which you
are readinj^ does not show whether or not you are still quoting Larsen,
but I take it that you are.
Do you see the quotation marks ?
Senator ^McCarthy. I will tell the Chair when I finish the quote.
Senator Tydixgs. If you will do that, we can follow it better.
Senator McCarthy. I will do that, sir.
How did it happen that the United States began to turn in 1944 upon its loyal
ally, the Chiang Kai-^hek Government, which had for 7 years fought Japan, and
to assume the spon^rship of the rebel Communist regime which collaborated
with the Japanese during the period of the Stalin-Hitler pact? How did it come
to pass that Washington since 1944 has been seeking to foist Communist mem-
bers upon the sole recognized and legitimate government of China, a maneuver
equivalent to an attempt by a powerful China to introduce Earl Browder and
William Z. Foster into key positions in the United States Government? How did
it transpire that our top-ranking military leader, General Marshall, should have
promoted an agreement in China under which American officers would be train-
ing and equipping rebel Chinese Communist units at the very time when they
were ambushing our marines and when Communists the world over were waging
a war of nerves upon the United States?
Whose was the hand which forced the sensational resignation of Under Sec-
retary of State Joseph C. Grew and his replacement by Dean Acheson? And
was the same hand responsible for driving Ambassador Patrick Hurley into a
blind alley and retirement?
The Chair will notice the quotation marks there. That will indi-
cate the end of that quotation.
In describing the arrest, Larsen had this to say about his arrival
at the office of the United States Commissioner :
There I found myself sitting next to John Stewart Service, a leading figure in
the pi-o-Soviet group in the China Section of the State Department, and to Lt.
Andrew Roth, liaison officer between the Office of Naval Intelligence and the
State Department, whom I also knew as an adherent of pro-Soviet policies.
Both of them were arrested separately the same night in Washington.
Larsen then goes on to describe John Stewart Service, John P.
Davies, Jr., and John Carter Vincent as the pro-Soviet group in the
China Section whose views were reflected by Amerasia and whose mem-
bers were in close touch with Jaife and Roth. In connection with this,
it will be remembered that John Service, as Stilwell's political adviser
accompanied a highly secret military commission to Yenan. Upon
the return of this mission, you will recall that Stilwell demanded that
Chiang Kai-shek allow him to equip and arm some oOO,()()0 Commu-
nists. Chiang Kai-shek objected on the grounds that this was part of
a Soviet plot to build up the rebel forces to the extent that they would
control China, (^hiang Kai-shek promptly requested the recall of
Stihvell and President Roosevelt wisely relieved Stilwell of his com-
134 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY IXVE'STIGATION
mand. It was at this time that Service submitted his report No. 40 to
the State Department, which accordino; to Hurley, was a plan for the
I'emoval of support from the Chiang Kai-shek government with the
end result that the Communists would take over.
The espionage cases apparently had their origin when a British
Intelligence Unit called attention to material being published in
Amerasia which was embarrassing its investigations.
Preliminary investigations conducted at that time by OSS disclosed
classified State Department material in the possession of Jafie and
Mitchell. The FBI men then took over and reported that in the
course of its quest it was found that John Stewart Service was in com-
munication from China with Jaffe. The substance of some of Serv-
ice's confidential messages to the State Department reached the offices
of Amerasia in New York before they arrived in Washington. One
of the papers found in Jaffe's possession was document No. 58, one of
Service's secret reports, entitled "Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek —
Decline of his Prestige and Criticism of and Opposition to his Lead-
ership."
In the course of the FBI investigation Amerasia was revealed as
the center of a group of active and enthusiastic Communists or fellow
travelers. To give you a better picture of Amerasia, it perhaps should
be mentioned here that Owen Lattiuiore was formerly an editor of
Amerasia, and Frederick Vanderbilt Field, a writer for the Daily
Worker, was the magazine head. Mr. Jaife incidentally was nat-
ui-alized in 1923 and served as a contributing editor of the Defender,
a monthly magazine of International Laljor Defense, a Communist
organization, in 1933. From 1934 to 1936 he had been a member of
the editorial board of China Today, which was a publication of the
pro-Soviet American PMends of the Chinese People. At that time
he operated under the alias of J. W. Philips. Under the name of
J. W. Philips, he presided in 1935 over a banquet at which Earl
Browder was a speaker — speaking now of a man whom Service was
in close contact while in China.
He also lectured at the Jefferson School of Social Science, an avowed
Communist Party institution. He was also a member of the board of
directors of the National Council of American Soviet Friendship.
The New York Times, subsequent to his arrest, referred to him as an
active supporter of pro-Communist and pro-Soviet movements for a
lunnber of years.
According to an article in Plain Talk magazine Jaffe has been a
liberal contributor to pro-Soviet causes and that on one occasion
he reserved two tables at a hotel banquet held to launch a pro-Com-
munist China front in the name of "The Fifth Floor, 35 East Twelfth
Street," which incidentally happens to be the National Headquarters
of the Communist Party.
I realize that this history of JafFe's activities is unnecessary for most
of the members of this investigating body, but I feel that the record
should be complete so that anyone who reads it will understand the
background of the individual to whom his four codefendants had been
delivering secret State and War Department material. His coeditor.
Miss Mitchell, gave a party for John S. Service when he returned from
China. Service had previously attended a special press conference
held by the Institute of Pacific Relations, in which he supported the
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 135
position of the Chinese Communists. The committee will recall that
the California committee cited the Institute of Pacific Relations as a
Conunnnist-front oroanization.
Larsen had this to say about his codefenclants :
I knew JalTe and his group as the editor of a magazine which had almost
semiofficial standing among the left wingers in the State Department.
The niojht Kate Mitchell was arrested, she had in her possession,
accordino- to Conirressman Dondero. a hifrhly confidential document
entitled "Plan of Battle Operation for Soldiers," a paper of such im-
portance that Army officers were subject to court martial if they lost
their copies.
Con<j:ressman Frank Fellows, a member of tlie Committee on the
Judiciary which investigated the grand jury which failed to indict
Service — incidentally, the committee's report shows that some of the
members of the grand jury voted for his indictment; that is in the
House report — wrote a minority report in which he stated :
The author of the resolution under which this committee assumed jurisdiction
stated upon the floor of the House, "The President authorized the arrest to be
made and the arrests were forbidden by the State Department."
Under Secretary Joseph C. Grew very urgently insisted upon a pro-
secution of the six individuals who were picked up by the FBI oil
charges of conspiracy to commit espionage. He thereupon immedi>
ately became a target in a campaign of vilification as the culprit in
the case rather than the six who had been picked up by the FBI.
I wish the committee would keep in mind when we are talking about
Service we are talking about the same Service whose loyalty report
was sent back to the State Department on March 3, 10 days ago, with
the request that they look it over again and appoint a new board
this time. It is the same Service, so there are some men over in the
Civil Service Commission loyalty board who certainly are loyalty
conscious.
Lieutenant Roth wrote a series of articles for a New York paper
and published a book in which he vigorously attacked Grew for his
opposition to the Communist sympathizers in the State Department
insofar as the far-eastern policy was concerned.
Under Secretary Grew, after a lifetime in the diplomatic service,
resigned, and President Truman announced that Dean Acheson would
take over the post of Under Secretary of State.
''During my conference with Mr. Jaffe in October," Larsen said,
'•he dropped a remark which one could never forget," and here is
what Jaffe had to say : "Well, Ave've suffered a lot, but anyhow we
got Grew out."
I might say that in the article in which I am quoting Larsen, the
article in Plain Talk, he quotes Joe Davies as saying that one of the
conditions of Acheson's taking over was the resignation of Grew.
Tliat is the quotation from Larsen's article in Plain Talk.
In regard to the legal handling of this case, the following is found
in Plain Talk in an article by Larsen :
While public attention was largely focused upon extraneous issues, the Espi-
onage case itself was following a special course behind the scenes. It appeared
that Kate Mitchell —
68970 — 50 — pt. 1 10
136 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVE'STIGATION
one of the coeditors of Amerasia and one of the codefendants —
had an influential uncle in Buffalo, a reputable attorney by the name of James
M. Mitchell, former president of the New York State Bar Association. Mr.
Mitchell was a member of a very influential law firm in Buffalo, Keneflck, Cooke,
Mitchell, Bass & Letch worth. The New York City correspondents of that law
firm include the most redoubtable Col. Joseph M. Hartfield, extremely well known
and extremely influential in Government circles in Washington. Col. Hartfield,
who is regarded by some as one of the most powerful political lawyers in the
country, made at least four trips to Washington where he called on top officials
of the Department of Justice in the matter.
In that connection I would like to quote a<^ain from Congressman
Dondero's talk on the House floor, in which he stated :
I have lieretofore charged and reiterated now that the court before whom these
cases were brought was not fully informed of the facts. A summary of the
court proceedings has been furnished to me, which shows no evidence or exliibit
obtained by the Federal Bureau of Investigation presented to the court.
This, incidentally, was not the FBI's case. They were not trying the
case. They merely presented the evidence.
.Jaffe's counsel told the court that Jaffe had no intention of harming the Govern-
ment, and United States Attorney Hitchcock told the court there was no element
of disloyalty in connection with the case. If that is the fact, may I respectfully
ask wliat purpose did these individuals have in mind in stealing these particular
files?
Had this same thing happened in certain other governments, these people would
undoubtedly have been summarily shot, without a trial. Let us not forget we
were still at war at that time with Germany and Japan when these files were
stolen, and Jaffe, in whose possession they were found, had been for more than
10 years a leader and heavy financial supporter of Communist propaganda causes,
according to the FBI.
As I stated above, after the grand jury failed to indict Mitchell,
Service, and Roth, the House passed a resolution in wliich it directed
( he Committee on the Judiciary —
to make a thorough investigation of all the circumstances with resrect to the
disposition of the charges of espionage and the possession of documents stolen
from secret Government files which were made by the Federal Bureau of In-
vestigation "against Philip J. Jaffe, Kate L. INIitchell, John Stewart Service,
Emmanuel Sigurd Larsen, Andrew Roth, and Mark Gayn," and to report to the
House (or to the Clerk of the House, if the House is not in session) as soon as
practicable during the present Congress, the results of its investigation, to-
gether with such recommendations as it deems necessary.
In this connection let me point this out to the committee. When
I mentioned John Stewart Service in February of this year the
State Department then prepared a press release, something to tell
the people what had happened in this case, of course. In that they
stated that Joltn Stewart Service had been cleared four times. One
of the times they refer to is the Hotise investigation of the grand
jury. They failed to tell the people that a number of the members of
that grand jur}', but not the required 12, voted for the indictment of
Service. They failed to tell the public that that grand jury, as I will
point out later, in effect has said, as I can show, that it is not a ques-
tion of guilt that they were going into —
we are concerned with a question of whether or not the evidence was in such
fashion that it could be presented to the court to prove the guilt.
Now, if that is what the State Department calls a clearance, when
less than the 12 votes are present for indictment, then I say there
is somebody wlio has a bad conception of the loyalty rules and regu-
lations in that Dej)artment.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 137
This committee then confirmed a report of a theft of a vast number
of documents from the State, War, and Navy Departments', which
i'an<2ed in classification all the way from top secret to confidential.
Tliis connnittee report indicates that a nnnioer of tlie members of
the grand jury voted for the indictment of Service and Mitchell on
the espionage charges, but that the required number of 12 did not so
vote.
It will be noted that the connnittee was not appointed for the pur-
pose of passing upon the guilt or innocense of the espionage suspects,
l)ut the connnittee was appointed for the purpose of investigating the
Avay that the case was handled and to make recommendations. The
committee did not in any way question the theft of the documents.
Incidentally, the committee said nothing to indicate that they thought
Service was not guilty. Howevi-r, it seemed to place a great deal of
stress upon the fact that the documents might not be admissible in
evidence because of the method of obtaining them.
For example, on page 5 the report states as follows :
4. Mauy of the identifiable documents might have had their evidential value
desitroyed* by reason of tlie possibility of the court's sustaining the defendants'
motions nrtai-liing the warrants of arrest.
VL Judicial decisions require scrupulous care to see that searches and seizures
are reasonable. While search and seizure on arrest may be made without a
search warrant, yet this is not so unless the warrant of arrest issued after
"probable cause" of guilt had been established by legal evidence.
On page 6 of the report the following statement is made :
If the warrant for arrest was not issued on "probable cause" substantiated
by facts, the evidence disclosed as a result of the search and seizure incident
to the arrest based on such a warrant should be subject to suppression and,
therefore, not usable as evidence of the crime for whicli the arrest was made.
I think this is extremely important in considering this Service case
and considering any statements that he was cleared by this grand
jury. The House committee, in effect, says that the reason they are
not taking action, not against Service — they had no right to take
action against Service — the House committee says :
The retison we are not taking action against the grand .iury in this case is
because, while in effect all of those documents were stolen —
some foiu' or five hundred ; I forget the luunber —
they were ol)tained in such a manner by the FBI, under the search warrant,
that perhaps they could not be effectively used in convicting these men —
the six individuals who had stolen them.
Senator Ttdixgs. We understand your point, Senator.
Senator McCarthy. I want to make it very clear in the record.
I am speaking not only for the committee but trying to make a very
complete record in all these cases, Mr. Chairman.
Wliile I have not seen any testimony of any of the grand jurors
themselves, and do not know whether it is available or not, the above
would seem to indicate that the committee felt that the grand jury
was disturbed, not so much by the question of guilt or innocence of
the defendants but by the question as to whether or not the guilt or
innocence could lie proven. They apparently felt that much of the
material would not be admissible because of the method of search
138 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY IXVE'STIGATION"
and seizure. The following comment will be noted on page 7 of the^
committee report :
Most of the items seized at Jaffe's ottice were typewritten copies. Some of such,
copies were proved to have been typed in one of the Government departments..
It may be fairly inferred that the originals of such copies were never removed,
but that copies were made at the department or auency where the original
reposed.
Let me cite this for the benefit of the lawyers, especially, on the
committee. Here is what the committee report says in accnsing the-
grand jury. They say :
Most of the items seized at Jaffe's office were typewritten copies. Some of
such copies were proved to have been typed in one of the Government depart-
ments. It may be fairly inferred that the originals of siich copies were never
removed but that copies were made at the department or agency where the-
original reposed.
This seems to make it very clear that the committee, for some
unknown reason, felt that making copies of secret documents and then
delivering the copies to unauthorized persons placed the crime in a
diiferent class than if they had delivered the originals. It is rather
cliiRcult to understand this reasoning, in view of the fact that photo-
stats or copies of an impoi'tant secret document would normally be of
the same value to any enemy power as the original.
The committee further pointed out that an additional reason for
not finding the grand jury at fault is because any of the six: can still
be further prosecuted on the charge of espionage. That, of course,,
is no longer true. The statute of limitations has now run. The
majority report makes some excellent recommendations, which the
Secretary of State might well read. I especially call his attention to>
recommendations 1, 2, and 3 on page 9, which read as follows :
1. That the head of every department and agency of our Government see to-
it that more — much more — care be exercised in personnel procurement. That
all those considered for Government positions in every echelon be investigated
so tlK)roughly as to insure that no one be employed unless absolute certainty
has been attained that nothing in background, present attitude, or affiliations
I'aises any reasonable doubt of loyalty and patriotic devotion to the United
States of America.
That is very good advice for the Secretary of State if he will
follow it.
2. That the watchword and motivating principle of Grovernment
employment must be : None but the best. For the fewer, the better ,^
unless above question.
3. Again the recommendation of the House committee —
That each and every present employee who fails to measure up to the highest
standard should be discharged. No house divided against itself can stand.
One of the members of the six-man committee, Congressman Han-
cock, was prevented by illness from participating in the report. Two
of the members of the committee wrote dissenting opinions, which
meant that the decision to absolve the grand jury of responsibility
was made by a 3 to 2 decision.
There are other valuable recommendations made by that House
connnittee, recommendations with which I do not think anyone can
disagree.
I might say this : I am not criticizing the House committee for fail-
ing to recommend action against the grand jury. Wltile I think their
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVElSTIGATION 139
Teasonintr. wlion they say some of the docuinents were only copies and
tliei-efore they do not have the same strength as the originals, is rather
ridiculous, there were some competent hiwyers on that House com-
mittee. I understand, and I can see where they would decide that
even though the evidence was overwhelming to prove the guilt of
these six individuals, if the evidence were i^ot in such shape that it
•could be used in a court of law to convict under the circumstances,
they could well have said "We will not recommend any action against
the grand jury."
So that House committee, which was not considering the guilt of
Service but considering whether or not the grand jury was competent,
rendered a split decision, 3 to 2, and decided that they would not
hold the grand jury liable in this case, and that is the type of clear-
ance that the State Department refers to when they tell the country
"This man was cleared four times.''
Congressman Fellows, in his dissenting opinion, made the following
statement :
JafEe either took these docuaients himself, or his confederates took them
for him. And two of the documents found were top secret, so marked and so
desi.£nated. I can see no point in arguing that these papers may not have been
of much value. The thieves thought the.v were. The Government agencies
so ad.iudged them. And the facts show that the defendants could have had
their choice of an.v documents they wished ; they were given no protection so
far as the State Department was concerned.
That is the end of Congressman Fellows' quotation. He was a
member of the Un-American Activities Committee,
Tliis transaction, or rather a series of transactions involved, embraces the
unlawful removal of top secret, secret, confidential, and restricted flies from the
Department of State, in our National Government. This. .Air. Chairman, is a very
serious offense. In time of war, this is a most serious offense. When war is in
progress, or even in time of peace, it is of little or no concern whether the files
removed were originals or copies; the fact that information of either or any
classification was removed from the secret files in the Department of State and
was delivered to any individual, or group of individuals, who had no lawful
right to receive the same, is the essence of the offense.
I call the committee's attention to this. Here is where the majority
went wrong, for whether they were copies or originals, the crime was
the same :
Wlien that very secret information was thus unlawfully revealed to others, no
matter how the same was imparted to Mr. Jaffe, whetlier by an original, or by
copy, or by any other method, the real damage has been done.
There should not be any attempt made in the report to either minimize or
acquit anyone from the magnitude of the act or acts committed. The report
filed appears to at least attempt to either minimize or completely justify some
of the unlawful acts which were undoubtedly committed.
All of those who participated in any way in the i-emoval, or attempted removal,
of these documents from the Department of State, or who copied such reports
and thereafter delivered such copies to Mr. Jaffe, or to any other person, not
lawfully entitled to receive the same, should be prosecuted, and all those par-
ticii)ating. in any degree, in the unlawful acts under investigation should be
immediately discharged from their positions in our Government. The repoi't
should speak strongly and without any reservation upon that subject.
I might say, after this recommendation was made, Mr. Chairman, as
the Chair knows, not only was John Service reinstated, after they got
lid of Joe Grew, but he was placed subsequently in charge of promo-
tion and placement of personnel in the Far Eastern Division, or some
title such as that, so the State Department certainly did not take the
140 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY IXVE'STIGATIGN'
advice of either the majority or the minority opinion of that com-
mittee.
Again quoting from the minority opinion :
• The questions here involved are so grave and the offenses so great that no
effort should be made to protect or defend those who so offended, but the report
should be made both firm and strong — to speak the truth — but to place the blame
where the same rightfully belongs.
This is but a small portion of the pertinent background of Service,
but certainly, beyond doubt, it forever excludes this man as a security
risk, no matter what yardstick is used, and again may I say I con-
gratulate the Civil Service Loyalty Appeals Board in this case,
though not in some of the others we will bring up, for having the in-
telligence and guts to send this back and say that: the State Depart-
ment loyalty board who cleared this man did wrong, and the next time
we don't want the same men sitting on the board, and I certainly hope
that the State Department follows the advice of the Civil Service
Loyalty Appeals Board.
Again we have a known associate and collaborator with Communists
and pro-Communists, a man high in the State Department, consorting
with admitted espionage agents, and I wish to say to this committee
what I said on the floor of the Senate on P'ebruary 20, 1950 :
When Chiang Kai-shek was fighting our war, the State Department had in
China a young man named John S. Service. His task, obviously, was not to
work for the coniniunization of China. Strangely, however, he sent oflicial re-
ports back to the State Department iirging that we torpedo our ally Chiang
Kai-shek and stating, in effect, that communism was the best hope of China.
Later this man — John Service — was picked up by the Federal Bureau of In-
vestigation for turning over to the Communists secret State Department informa-
tion. Strangely, however, he was never prosecuted. However, Joseph Grew, the
Under Secretary of State, who insisted on his prosecution, was forced to resign.
Two days after Grew's successor. Dean Acheson, took over as Under Secretary
of State, this man John Service, who had been picked up by the FBI and who
had previously urged that communism was the best hope of China, was not only
reinstated in the State Department but promoted. And finally, under Acheson,
placed in charge of all placements and promotions.
I might say I think the Avord "all" should not have been in that
speech. I believe it was only in charge of placements and promotions
in the far-eastern area.
Mr. Chairman, today this man. John S. Service, is a ranking officer
in the policy-making group of "untouchables" on duty in Calcutta,
India, one of the most strategically important listening posts in the
w^orld today, and since the fall of China the most important new front
of the cold war.
Five times this man has been investigated as to his loyalty and his
acceptance as a security risk to the Nation.
Wliat possible reason could there have been for even a second in-
vestigation of his record?
He was not an acceptable security risk under Mr. Acheson's own
"yardstick of loyaltj- '■ the day he entered the Government.
He is not a sound security risk today.
I am going to try to finish out a short one. I would like permission
to finish it even if the bell does ring before I get through.
Senator Tydings. All right. Senator. We wdll give you the time.
Might I ask if you have an approximation of the amount of time
you would like to have to finish this?
STATE DEPARTME:NT employee loyalty INVEiSTIGATION 141
Senator McCarthy. It will take some time on this, Mr. Chairman.
Tlien I have a sizable number of names which I wish to present to the
committee, not in the public record but some for the staff, now that a
staff has been appointed. I cannot finish it between now and 12
o'clock.
Senator Tymngs. We will wait a little longer. Go ahead.
Senator McCarthy. I might say that I am very gratefid for the
fact that I have been able to put my case on in the manner that I have
been in the last 2 days. I want to thank the Senator very much.
Senator Tydixgs. Senator jNlcCarthy, of course we are going to re-
serve the right to ask you some questions. We are not doing it now
because we do not want to interrupt you.
Senator McCarthy. Absolutely, and I certainly will be here for
any questions you want to ask.
if the Chair wants to ask questions about the last case
Senator Tydixgs. Inasmuch as we have let them all go by with no
opportunity for interrogation, we will have to go back and fill in
things we will want to know.
Senator McCarthy. Very good.
I would like to mark these. Mr. Chairman, as exhibits 36, 37, 38
Senator Tydixgs. It has been suggested that you use the three
initials of the subject in each case. Then there probably won't be any
confusion.
Senator McCarthy. Yes, I can do that.
Senator Tydixgs. I think that will be a good way to handle it.
Senator McCarthy. I have already marked these.
Senator Tydixgs. Go ahead and leave them that way.
Senator McCarthy. 39. 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, and 48.
Exhibits Nos. 36 to 48 I now offer as evidence in this case, if that
is agreeable to the Chair.
Senator Tydixgs. The exhibits will be printed at the appropriate
place in the Senator's remarks.
The Department of State of the United States operates with thou-
sands of employees and requires a tremendous budget which has
aided materially in placing on the American people the greatest tax
burden they have ever been called u])on to bear.
All but a_ small handful of those employees are honest and loyal
Americans. The State Department is their life work. They have
given to it years of service, unquestioned loyalty ; and they have served
it with great pride.
In the far-flung places of the world, these loyal men and women
have spent their lives and exercised all their ingenuity to give to their
De])artment and their Government every possible bit of information
and advice they thought useful.
Career employees of the State Department, by virtue of their long
residence in every foreign country on the globe and their close asso-
ciation, and many times friendship, with citizens and officials of those
countries, have had access to, have reported on, every phase of eco-
nomic and political affairs in the nations to which they are attached.
These are the real "experts" of the State Department.
It is a tragedy when we find the advice and experiences of such
outstandingly able employees stored in a multitude of steel filing
cases and disregarded while the Department of State's closed corpora-
tion of "'untouchables" call upon pro-Communist idealists, crackpots,
142 STATE DEPARTMEXT EMPLOYEE LOIALTY INVESTIGATION
and, to put it mildly, "bad security risks" to advise them on American
diplomatic policy.
The next case I wish to call to the attention of the committee is that
of Prof. Frederick L. Schuman.
Dr. Schuman is on the faculty of Williams College and is a highly
placed lecturer with the Department of State.
It is the function of Dr. Schuman to explain how to be better diplo-
mats to veteran diplomats and career men of the State Department
in its Division of Training Services.
Senator Tydings. I do not know this gentleman or anything about
him. Might I ask you if he is an emi)loyee of the State DejDartment ?
Senator McCarthy. He is one of the lecturers, as I will show you.
His task has been to come in and lecture to young men sent out into
foreign fields and tell them how they should be guided.
Senator Tydings. I undei'stand that, but I do not know what his
status is. Is he an employee or not an emploj- ee ?
Senator McCarthy. Do you mean does he get paid for that ?
Senator Tydings. Both ways. Does he work for the State De-
partment?
Senator McCarthy. That, Mr. Chairman, is not a year-round job, I
understand. He is listed, I believe, as a consultant. If you call the
State Department and say "Is he working there?" if they check and
find he made no lecture today, which he obviously didn't, they will
undoubtedly tell you he is not working for the State Department.
He is one of the lecturers.
Senator Tydings. How often does he lecture ? Have you any idea ?
Do you know whether he is paid or not for those lectures ?
Senator McCarthy. I don't know. In fact, I don't think that is
important.
Senator Tydings. We will find out. I thought maybe your record
might have it.
Senator McCarthy. I don't think it is a question of whether he is
paid. It is the fact that this man is picked, of all the competent, out-
standing Americans we have, to come and tell these young men who
are going into the field how they should act and what they should
do that is an unusual matter.
It is the function of Dr. Schuman to explain how to be better diplo-
mats to veteran diplomats and career men of the State Department in
its Division of Training Services. He is described by the State De-
partment itself as one of a group of "experts on subjects of importance
in diplomacy."
Appearing with Professor Schuman in the lecture program were
Owen Lattimore and Dr. Edward C. Acheson, director of the School of
Foreign Service at George Washington University and brother of Sec-
retary of State Dean Acheson.
Let me make it clear that I am not referring to any one program
in which all three of them appeared. I am referring to three men who
were called in to make these lectures.
Dr. Schuman was formerly with the Federal Communications Com-
mission, where he served under Mr. Goodman Watson, who was finally
discharged by that department.
Dr. Schuman is one of the closest collaborators in and sponsors of
Communist- front organizations in America.
STATE DEPAETMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 143
He was affiliated with the National Council of the Arts, Sciences
and Professions, which was denounced as a subversive organization
by the House Committee on Un-American Activities. This is the or-
franization under whose auspices was held the Cultural and Science
Conference for World Peace at the Hotel Waldorf-Astoria in New
York from March 25 to 29, 1949, and which, incidentally, was de-
nounced by the Secretary
Senator Tydings. Which Secretary ?
Senator McCarthy. Secretary of State Acheson. If I can quote his
exact words, I think he said it was "a sounding board for Russian
propaganda."
This organization was denounced as an instrument of Soviet propa-
ganda by the State Department.
Dr. Schuman's affiliations with the National Council of the Arts,
Sciences and Professions are not casual. He was a member of its
policy and program committee in 1948. To those who say many of
these Communist-front connections have been at a time when we were
friends wath Russia, I call attention to the fact that there has been
no break from even during the days of the Hitler-Stalin Pact right up
mitil 1948 and 1949. You don't find any change whatsoever in their
sponsorship of these Comnumist front organizations, and I might say
that some individuals can come down and say "I didn't know about
this organization: I didn't know anything about its aims," but not
Dr. Schuman. When he belongs to the organizations I am going to
give you, you can be sure he knows what he is doing. This is the man
w^ho lectures in the State Department.
He was a signer of a press release of the same organization on March
1, 1949. He was a member of the National Council of the Arts, Sci-
ences and Professions for Wallace, according to the Daily Worker,
August 18, 1948, page 7, and he again appeared as a sponsor, according
to the Daily Worker on October 19, 1948, page 2.
Professor Schuman was a sponsor of the American Committee for
the Protection of the Foreign Born, which was cited as subversive
by the Attorney General, the House Committee on Un-American Ac-
tivities, and the California Committee on Un-American Activities.
He was prominent in the affairs of the American Council on Soviet
Relations, which has been cited by subvei^ive by the Attorney Cen-
tral, the House Committee on Un-American Activities and the Cali-
fornia Committee on Un-American Activities. He was a sponsor of
the American League for Peace and Democracy, which has been
cited by the same three official bodies as a communistic and subversive
organization.
The American Russian Institute, which has also been the recipient
of Professor Schuman's aid, has been cited as communistic and sub-
versive by the Attorney General, the House Committee on Un-Ameri-
can Activities, and the California Committee on Un-American
Activities.
The same adherence applies to the American Slav Congress, which
the same three organizations have cited as subversive.
He sponsored the Civil Rights Congress, an organization teiTiied
subvei"sive by the House Committee on Un-American Activities ; and
he was also affiliated with the Committee for Boycott Against Japanese
Aggression, named communistic and subversive by the Attorney
144 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY IXVESTIGATIOX
General, the House Un-American Activities Committee, and the Cali-
fornia Committee on Un-American Activities.
Professor Schmnan lent his name and prestige to the activities ot the
Friends of the Soviet Union, which was cited by all three of the above
as officially a communistic and subversive organization. The African
Aid Committee was named subversive and communistic by the At-
torney General, the House Un-American Activities Committee, and the
California Un-American Activities Committee; and here again we
have Professor Schuman as a sponsor. The same three agencies have
declared subversive and communistic the National Conference ot
American Policy in China and the Far East. This is one he has been
really active in. They called a conference under the auspices of the
Committee for a Democratic Far Eastern Policy. Here again we have
Professor Schuman lending aid and comfort to a subversive organ-
ization. - - . ,,
We could perhaps continue for hours m elaborating on the pro-
Communist affiliations of this consultant to the small group of "un-
touchables" who determine, force through, and carry out the foreign
policy of this country. .
I have chosen at random some of the organizations, all pro-L.om-
munist in nature, with which this man has been affiliated.
Incidentally, when I talked about this man's activities as a lecturer,
I hope I made it clear that that was one of his activities in the State
Department. He is also a consultant, one of the authorities on far-
eastern affairs, naturally. A most casual survey of these organizations
will indicate that, if he is not a card-holding member of the Com-
munist Party, the difference is so slight that it is unimportant.
Now, Mr. Chairman, I have before me the photostats of documents
showing his connection with there organizations. In view of the fact
that the Senate is in session, I am not going to take the Senators'
time to read them. i • i i
Senator Tydings. They will be put in the record at this place as the
Senator has marked them.
Exhibit 36
American Committee for Protection of Foreign Born,
New York 10. N. Y., February 8, 19.1,9.
Testimonial to Ellis Island Hunger Strikers
-CHARLES DOYLE— GERHART EISLER— IRVING POTASH— FERDINAND C. SMITH— JOHN
WILLIAMSON
Hotel McAlpin, New York City, March 3, 1949
Dear Friend: We invite you to join with us in a testimonial dinner to be lield
Ht the McAlpin Hotel, New York City, on Thursday evening, March 3. 1949, for
the five men who participated in a hunger strike on Ellis Island, during March
1948
These five men— Charles Doyle, Gerhart Eisler, Irving Potash, Ferdinand Smith,
and John Williamson— uniteci in a hunger strike in order that the constitutional
right to bail should not be lost to the American people.
As you will remember, people all over the country joined in demonstrations
for them and the principle for which they so heroically were ready to give their
lives. As a result, bail was granted by the courts. ^ « w
We are holding this testimonial on the first anniversary of their great fight
which is not vet won. Bail has been granted to Irving Potash, Ferdinand Smith,
and John Williamson by the Immigration and Naturalization Service. But it is
still being denied to Charles Doyle and Gerhart Eisler, although they are at this
moment free on the original bail granted by the courts.
STATE DEPARTJSIENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 145
Therefore, the fight for bail must go on. This testimonial must demonstrate
•our determination to continue the defense of Doyle and Eislcr and to carry on au
(>ffeciive campaign to defeat the Justice Department's deportation (h-ive.
We hope that you will participate with us in this testimonial. Reservations
^re $6 per plate. Reservations for tables of 10 are $60.
Sincerely yours,
Rev. John W. Dark, Jr.,
Chairman, Board of Directors.
Exhibit 37
China aid Council,"
American Le^vgue for Peace and Democracy,
Champaiyn-Urbana Branch , June 11, 1938.
M\ss Jane Swaxhauser.
Chicago, III.
Dear Miss Swanhauser : Since you give us the choice of day for Dr. Su, I
will ask for Friday, June 24, or Saturday, June 25. I still leave it to you to
decide which of these two days, since I feel it is possible some other branch may
have sjioken already for one of these two dates 1 named. Kindly write at once
which date I may count upon and send me, tirst of all, any particulars about
Dr. Su that I may use in publicity ; also tell me if this trip is to raise money
for I must pay $15 flat if I use a university hall and make any sort of collection.
lYe have little hope of raising nuich here, as the bowl of rice drive is now on,
but we feel that if Dr. Su can speak to the 3,000 students of the summer school
-who come, many of them from country regions, that they will carry the idea of
iboycott, etc., back to their homes and spread the idea. I am sure you will consider
even this worth while. I shall not be able to do any advertising until I hear from
jou, so please write as soon as possible.
Sincerely,
Anna H. Rubio.
Exhibit 38
African Aid Committee,
New York 10, N. Y., January 20, 1950.
Dear Friend : "We have l»nt one appeal to make to you. our brothers abroad —
your moral and tinancial support will highly be appreciated" — that is the message
from leaders of the Nigerian workers recently shot down while striking for
SO cents a day pay.
A token contribution of $2(X> has already been sent to these workers by our
<ommittee. We nuist send more. With your help, we can do so.
Even if you have already contributed to the African Aid Committee, we urge you
to give again in this emergency.
And please help us in reaching others with this appeal by signing and returning
the blank below.
Very truly yours,
W. E. B. Du Bois, Chairman.
To Dr. W. E. B. Dr Bois.
African Aid Committee:
I'll be glad to get others to help, too.
Send me materials for soliciting contributions among my friends and organiza-
tions in response to the appeal from the workers of Nigeria.
Name __.
Address
(Plea.se sign and return if you can assist in this way.)
146
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY IKA'ESTIGATION
AFRICAN AID COMMITTEE SPONSORS
Elisha Bailey, Panama
Louise R. Berman, New York City
Dr. Phillips Brooks, Brooklyn, N. Y.
Peter B. Brown, Chicago, 111.
Lonis E. Biirnham, Birmingham, Ala.
Hugh Bryson, San Francisco, Calif.
Charles A. Collins, New York City
Councilman Eugene P. Connolly, New
York City
Evelyn Cooper, Brooklyn, N. Y.
Dr. Oliver C. Cox, Tuskegee Institute
Bindley C. Cyrus, Chicago, 111.
Wendell P. Dabney, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Councilman Benj. J. Davis. Jr., New
York City
E. A. Davis, Toronto, Canada
Earl B. Dickerson, Chicago, 111.
Dean Dixon, New York City
Dr. Arnold B. Donawa, New York City
Aaron Douglas, Fisk University
Arnaud D'Usseau, New York City
Rev. Charles C. S. England, Brooklvn,
N. Y.
Howard Fast, New York City
Frederick V. Field, New York Citv
Elinor S. Gimbel, New York Citv
Ben Gold, New York City
Kumar Goshal, Brooklyn, N. Y.
Shirley Graham, St. Albans, N. Y.
Percy Greene, Jackson, Miss.
Ewart Guinier, New York City.
Dashiell Hammett, New York City
William Harrison, Boston, Mass.
Rev. Dr. Wm. P. Hayes, Newark, N. J.
Donald Henderson, Philadelphia, Pa.
Rev. Charles A. Hill, Detroit, Mich.
Velnia Hopkins. Winston-Salem, N. C.
Rev. J. L. Horace, Chicago, 111.
Charles H. Houston, Washington, D. C.
Charles P. Howard, Des Moines, Iowa
Rev. Kenneth de P. Hughes, Cambridge,
Mass.
Langston Hughes, New York City
Dr. W. A. Hunton, Brooklyn, N. Y.
Ada B. Jackson. Brooklyn. N. Y.
Luther P. Jackson, Virginia State Col-
lege
David Jenkins, California Labor School
Rev. C. Asapansa Johnson, Staten Is-
land. N. Y.
Dt. R. O. Johnson, Atlanta. Ga.
Albert E. Kahn, Croton-on-Hudson,
N. Y.
Rockwell Kent, Au Sable Forks, N. Y,
John Howard Lawson, San Fernando,
Calif.
Ray Lev, New York City
Dorothy C. Lymas, Philadelphia, Pa.
Albert Maltz, Los Angeles, Calif.
Dr. Cecil Marquez, New York City
George Marshall, New York City
Larkin Marshall, Macon, Ga.
Dr. Benjamin E. Mays, Morehouse Col-
lege
Rev. Jack R. McMichael, New York City
John T. McManus, New York City
Rev. Wm. Howard Melish, Brooklyn,
N. Y.
Herbert T. Miller. Brooklyn, N. Y.
Willard Motley, Chicago, 111.
Rev. Chas. C. Monlton, Panama
Capt. Hugh Mulzac, Jamaica, N. Y.
George B. Murphy, Jr.. New York City
Estelle Massey Osborne. New York City
Rev. George L. Paine, Boston. Mass.
Father Clarence Parker, Chicago, 111.
William L. Patterson, New York City
Dr. H. T. Penn, Roanoke. Va.
Dr. Charles A. Petioni. New York City
Martin Popper, New York City
Eslanda G. Robeson. Enfield, Conn.
Paul Robeson, New York City
Dr. B. J. Robinson, Los Angeles, Calif.
Rev. James H. Robinson. New York City
Therese L. Robinson, Washington, D. 0.
O. John Rogge, New York City
Paul Schnur, San Francisco, Calif.
Prof. Frederick L. Schuman, Williams-
town, Mass.
Mrs. Andrew W. Simkins, Columbia,
S. C.
Ferdinand C. Smith, New York City
Rev. Stephen G. Spottswood, Washing-
ton, D. C.
Max Steinberg, New York City
Dr. Bernhard J. Stern, New York City
Ella P. Stewart, Toledo, Ohio
Deems Taylor, New York City
Rebecca Stiles Taylor, Chicago, 111.
Alma Vessells, New York City
Henry A. Wallace. South Salem, N. Y.
Bishop Wm. J. Walls, Chicago, 111.
Dr. Edward K. Weaver. Texas College
Dr. Gene Weltfish. New York City
Dr. Charles H. Wesley, Wilberforee,
Ohio
Lindsay White, New York City
Di-. J. Finley Wilson, Washington, D. C.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVEISTIGATION 147
Exhibit 39
Call to a Xatioaal Conferenck on American Policy in China and the
Far East
Friday, Saturday, and Sunday, January 28-25, 1948, Hotel Roosevelt, New York
City
National Cliairmen : T. A. Bisson, Dr. W. E. B. Dubois. Hon. Stanley M. Isaacs ;
Organizing Secretary Stephen H. Fritcliman
"It is my considered opinion that future generations will regard the betrayal of
the Chinese people by the American Government in the Truman administration
as one of the greatest errors ever made in American diplomacy." — Brig. Gen.
Evans F. Carlson, United States Marine Corps.
The three undersigned ntaional cha'rmen call upon all interested organizations
to send delegates and observers to a national conference on American policy in
China and the Far East to be held in New York City, January 23, 24, and 25,
194S.
The purposes of the conference are to discuss and plan action on —
1. The halting of United States intervention in China and other friendly far
eastern countries.
2. The carrying out of the democratic decisions of the Potsdam agreement and
the Moscow conference regarding policies in Japan and Korea.
8. The relationship between far eastern policy and domestic well-being.
4. A program to achieve a genuinely democratic far eastern policy which alone
can give any hope of peace.
o. Rallying all democratic Americans to support of such a program.
We Americans have always felt a pride and strength in our heritage as a
dem(»cratic people. Our Government's present far eastern policy violates our
most c-herished American political beliefs and threatens our own democracy.
In China, the largest nation in earth, United States policy, through military,
financial, and political intervention, is aiding in the imposition of a backward,
corrupt and violently antidemocratic regime which the vast majority of the
Chinese people themselves repudiate. The most reactionary elements in the
United States are now scheming for further intervention on a scale which will
subject the Chinese people to an autocracy dependent upon outside financial and
military help — that is the United States — for its continued existence. This
American intervention also violates the Charter of the United Nations.
In Japan, many observers. Americans and others, are deeply disturbed over
the practically unilateral American occupation which seems less concerned about
eradicaring the reactionary elements responsible for Pearl Harbor than is now
harnessing these elements to the dangerous ambitions of an antidemocratic
American group.
In the I'hilippines. the American Government is giving energetic support to
Filipino collaborationists and other betrayers of their country's independence;
and by imposing upon the I'hilippines economic conditions inimical to their
development as a free nation, is making a mockery of Philippine independence.
In Indonesia, the people struggling against their Dutch oppressors have been
forsaken by an American policy evidently geared to safeguarding the status quo
rather than to giving encouragement to those seeking freedom and a rising
standard of living.
In southern Korea, where American occupation forces now rule over people
who wore our allies in the war, economic chaos and political fascism are the
fruits of American policy.
The Ameru-an democratic heritage and destiny is now suffering what may
prove irrevocable damage from the present far-eastern policy of our (iovern-
ment. This policy is costing us taxpayers billions of futile dollars; it is post-
poning the healthy trans-Pacific trade we should be enjoying ; it is creating condi-
tions that contrilnite toward an economic depression here at home; it is fast
making enemies of the millions of Asia who are our natural allies in the desire
for a peaceful and democratic world: it is engendering international frictions
which can easily lead us into another war.
It is time for democratic American citizens to act. In addition to organiza-
tional delegates and observers we invite individuals to attend as visitors.
This conference will bring together citizens who wish to secure the facts and
understand the issues related to far eastern policy, and to discuss the means of
148 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY IX^ESTIGATION
effective citizensliip action on that policy. The conference will assist the dele-
gates and individuals to carry back to their organizations and communities the-
facts, insights, convictions, and suggested methods of action necessary at this
time. All decisions of the conference will come out of floor discussion and, we-
hope, will be implemented in whole or in part, by each organization in its own.
way.
T. A. BissoN,
W. E. B. Dubois,
Stanley M. Isaacs,
National Chairmen.
PROGRAM
Friday, January 28
8p. m fVmference mass meeting. City Center Casino, 135-
West Fifty-fifth Street :
Speakers : Anna Louise Strong, first hand report on
the Far East, just returned from li/o years in
China and noi-thern Korea ; Dr. .Tames G. Endicott,
Toronto, recently returned China-born missionary
for the United Church of Canada ; Dr. Rexford Guy
Tugwell.
Saturday, January 24
9-10 a. m Registration of delegates and observers, and meeting^
of sponsors.
10-12 m Election of conference committee.
Delegates' hour : Opportunity to present questions tc
experts on tlie Far East.
Keynote address : Hugh Bryson. San Francisco.
2-5 p. m Wliat is the United States doing in China?'
8-10 : 30 p. m What is the United States doing in colonial ai'eas?'
Dramatic presentation by Theater Workshop.
Sunday, January 25
9: 30-10: 15 a. m Memorial service for Brig. Gen. Evans F. Carlson,
United States Marine Corps ; address by Michael
Straight, publisher. New Republic.
10 : 15-12 m What is the United States doing in Japan and Korea? *
2-4 : 30 p. m Report of conference committee; adoption of action
program.
Closing address : Paul Robeson.
Adjournment.
Additional conference speakers include : Hugh DeLacy. Israel Epstein. Mark
Gayn, and the three cochairmen. Dr. W. E. B. DuBois, T. A. Bisson, and
Stanley M. Isaacs. Further speakers will be announced.
SPONSORS
(Partial listing)
Organizations are listed for the purpose of identification only. Such listing
does not indicate sponsorship of the conference by these organizations
Louis Adamic, writer Dr. Deik Bodde. University of Penn-
Charlotte Adams, editor, Look maga- .sylvania
zine Dr. Dwight Bradley, consulting psy-
Dr. Thomas Addis, Leland Stanford chologist
University. Josepli Brainen, chairman. American
Emily G. Balch. Nobel Peace Prize, Committee of Jewish Writers. Ar-
1946 tists, and Scientists
C. B. Baldwin, executive vice-chairman, Harry Bridges, president. International
Progressive Citizens of America Longshoremen's and Warehouse-
S. L. M. Barlow, composer mens Union
John W. Bicknell. writer on the Far Di-. Charlotte Hawkins Brown, presi-
Ej^gl; dent. Palmer ^Memorial Institute
Charles Bid' en. e^>H-ntivp spcr^torv. Hugh Bryson. president. National
American Committee for Free In- Union Marine Cooks and Stewards
donesia Henrietta Buckmaster, writer
Dr. Algernon Black, executive leader, Angus Cameron, editor-m-cnief. Little
Ethical Culture Society Brown & Co.
1 The ma.ior portion of these sessions will be devotetT to delegates' discnssions of positive
action on far eastern policy.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 149
Chu Tonj;. editor. China Daily News
Dr. Uiifus E. Clement, president, Atlan-
ta Universit.v
Kev. Donald B. Cloward. execntive sec-
retary, Council on Christian Social
Troiiress
Dr. Clark Walker Cunnninps. exeentive
seeretary. Metropolitan Chnrrh Fed-
eration. St. Lonis. Mo.
Dr. II. W. L. Dana, educator
l{ev. John W. Darr, Jr., executive sec-
retary. United Christian Council for
Democracy
Frank Marshall Davis, assistant editor,
Chicai;o Star
Hugh DeLacy, foi'mer United States
Congressman
Mrs. Elliott Dexter, Encino, Calif.
J()hn T. Doles. Jr., lawyer
Dorothy Doyle, nurse, recentl.\- with
UNRRA in China
Muriel Draper, executive vice presi-
dent. Congress of American Women
Barrows Dunham, writer
James Durkin. president. United Office
and Professional Workers of Am.n-
ica
Dr. Henry Pratt Fairchild, New York
University
Frederick V. Field, writer
Olga Field, writei on the Far East
Dorothy Cantield Fisher, writer
Dr. Albert L. Franzke, University of
Washington
Ben (lold. president. International Fur
and Leather Workers Union
Ira Gollobin, chairman. American Ver-
erans of the Philippine Campaign
Carlton B. Goodlett, president, San
Francisco National Association for
the Advancement of Colored People
Kumar Goshal. writer on India
Edmonia Grant, Associate Administra-
tor, Southern Conference for Human
Welfare
Dr. Ralph H. Gundlaeh. University of
Washington '
Uta Hagen. actress
Dr. Calvin S. Hall, Western Resei've
University
Dr. S. Raliih Harlow, Smith CoUege
William Harrison, as.sociate editor,
Boston Chronicle
Dr. A. Eustace Haydon, University of
Chicago, Divinity School
Charlotte Honig, husinesswoman
Leo Huberman, writer
Harold Ingalls, executive secretary,
Student Division, National YMCA
Philip Jaffe, publisher, Amerasia As-
s( c'iates
I>r. Pufus M. Jones. Haverford Collei-'^e
Philip O. Keeney, libraries officer, Su-
preme Command Allied Powers in
Japan
Dr. J. Spencer Kennard, educator, for-
mer Baptist missionary to Japan and
China
Dr. Raymond Kennedy, Yale Univer-
sity
Morris E. Kriensky, artist
Dr. John H. Lathrop. Church of the Sa-
viour. I'rooklyn
Richaid E. Lauterbach, editor, the
^lagazine '47
Harold Leventhal. chairman, American
Friends of India
Dr. Alain Locke. Howard University
Kev. Jack R. JIcMichael, executive sec-
retary. Mt^thodist Federation for
Social Action
Albert Maltz, writer
Dr. William Mandel, writer
(iHorge Marshall, cbairman, board oi
directors. Civil Rights Congress
Dr. Kirtley F. :\Iather, Harvard Uni-
versity
Dr. H. T. ]Medford, secretary. Foreign
Missions, A. M. E. Zion Church
Dr. Clyde R. Miller. Teachers College,
Columbia University
Kate L. ^litchell, writer on the Far
East
ISernard J. Mooney, upstate New York,
regional director, United Office and
Professional Workers of America
Rev. Richard iNlorford, executive direc-
tor. National Council of American-
Soviet Friendship
IJishop Arthur W. Moulton, Protestant
Episcopal Church
Gi-ant W. Oakes, president. Farm
lupiipment Workers Union
Patrick H. O'Brien, judge of probate,
Wayne County, Mich.
Mrs. Jessie L. O'Connor, Fort Worth,
Tex.
Dr. Ernest Osborne, Columbia Univer-
sity
Bishop Edward Parsons, Protestant
Episcopal Church
Kobert I'ayne, writer on the Far East
Dr. Arthur Upham Pope, chancellor,
Asia Institute
ilartin Popper, board of directors, Na-
tional Lawyer's Gn'ld
Dr. Edwin McNeill Poteat, president,
Colgate-Rochester Divinity School
Phelps Putman, poet.
Dr. Walter Rautenstrauch. educator
Dr. Raymond Robins, social economist
Holland Roljerts, director, Califorrija
Labor School
Paul Robeson, concert singer
Nathaniel L. Rock, lawyer
Sidney Roger, radio commentator, CCO
Edward Itohrbough, writer on the Far
Knst
Walter Rosenblnm, president. Photo
League
150 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
Mand Russell, executive director, Com-
mittee for a Democratic Far Eastern
Policy
Rose Russell, legislative director,
Teachers Union
Dr. W. Carson Ryan, University of
North Carolina
Dr. Frederick L. Schuman, William'^
College
Arthur Schutzer, New YorJc City
Dr. Vida D. Scudder, Wellesley College
Bernard Seeman, writer on the Far
East
Joseph P. Selly, president, American
Communications Association
Rev. Guy Emery Shipler, editor. The
Churchman
Elie Siegmeister, composer
Harold G. Slingerland, chairman, Che-
mung Comity American Labor Party
Dr. Maud Slye, University of Chicago
Agnes Smedley, writer on the Far P^ast
Christine B. Snuth, ijresident, National
Association of Colored Women
Ferdinand C. Smith, secretary, national
Maritime Union
Mrs. Edgar Snow, writer on the Far
East
Johannes Steel, publisher, Johannes
Steel Newsletter
Dr. Harry C. Steinmetz, San Diego
State College
We urge immediate registration.
Dr. Bernhard J. Stern, Columbia Uni-
versity
Martha Dodd Stern, writer
Annalee Stewart, president, U. S. Sec-
tion, Woman's International League
for Peace and Freedom
Paul Strand, artist
Frank E. Taylor, editor, Random House
Dr. Donald G. Tewksbury, Columbia
University
Dr. Rexford G. Tugwell, University of
Chicago
Jennette Turner, executive secretary,
New York City Consumer Council
Olive Van Horn, secretai-y for adnunis-
trative affairs. National YWCA
Rev. Eflgar ]M. Wahlberg, formerly with
UNRRA in China
Dr. Harry F. Ward, writer
( harles Weidman, dancer
Dr. Gene Weltfish, Columbia University
Dr. Charles PI. Wesley, president, Wil-
berforce State College
Howard Willard, artist
Dr. James M. Williams, Hobart College
Ella Winter, writer
Justice James H. Wolfe, Sunreme
Court. State of Utah
Uii-liard Yaffe, writer
Victor A. Yakhontolf, writer
William Zorach, scidptor
CONFERENCE APPLICATION
Name Address
I am an individual visitor Organizational delegate Appointed
observer
Organization represented
Indicate whether : National State Local
Enclosed is $ for registration fee ($3 per delegate)
Admission to single sessions (morning, afternoon, or evening) $1
Address requests for housing accommodations to organizing secretary
Contributions in support of the conference are invited
Address all comnmnications to: The Organizing Secretary, Far Eastern Con-
ference, 111 West Forty-second Street, New York 18, N'. Y., LOngacre 4-3943.
Exhibit 40
Urgent Summons to a Congress on Civil Rights in Detroit, April 27 and 28,
1946. to Organize an Offensive Against the Rising Fascist Aggression in
the United States
Today's drive to subvert our democratic liberties is well-organized, well-heeled,
insidious. It presents an emergency that emergency measures alone can meet.
The great war against fascism is won, but the victory is far from secure.
Only a coalition of all the forces of the people, through united action, can prevent
its destruction.
Here's what is happening in the United States :
PROGRAM
Congress on civil rights, Detroit, Mich., April 21 and 2!8, 19Ii6
Saturday morning. First Congregational Church (Woodward Avenue at Forest) :
11 a. m., registration.
12 noon, opening luncheon.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY IN VEST I CATION 151
Saturday afternoon. 2 p. ni. to fi p. tn., :\Iaccabees Auditorium (Woodward Avenue
at I'm nam) :
l>etVnso A.yainst tlu' Enemy Within — Presentation of key issues.
I'roteet Minorities for America's Defense — Tlie tight against police terror
in Columbia, Tenn., the Freeport Ivillings, and other \videspread violation
of civil rights: results of campaigns on tliese cases.
Labor's Rights— First Line of Defense — The tight against the Case bill,
police violence, the injunction menace.
Crush America's Fifth Colunm— The light against the Kanliiu committee,
Gerald L. K. Smith, the KKK, Bilbo and all domestic fascists.
Tlie :\Ienace of anti-Semitism and Jim Crow— The fight against terrorism,
and discrimination in employment, housing, and educaticm.
Initial report of resolutions conunittee ; report of credentials committee;
election of campaigns coordination committee.
Saturday evening, 8 : 30 p. m., reception for delegates by Michigan Civil Rights
Federation.
Sunday. 9 : 30 a. m. to 3 : 30 p. ra. :
Report of campaigns coordination committee. Discussion of proposals.
Luncheon recess.
Continued discussion :ind action on committee report.
Final report of resolutions committee.
Proposals f()r carrying out conference decisions.
Conference Headquarters: GO!) Hanunond Building, Fort and Woodward
Avenues. Detroit. Telephone : Cadillac 6278.
Registration : At First Congregational Church from 11 a. m. to 2 p. m. on
Saturday. After 2 p. m.. at Maccabees auditorium. Registration fee: $2 for
each (U'ganization delegate, or individual.
Rein-esent;iti()n : Two representatives from each organization; interested
indiv'(hia]s.
Conference huu-iieon : Saturday noon, at First Congres.sional Church.
Reservations nuiy he made at $l.r)0 per plate. I'lease make reservations in ad-
vance. Luncheon speakers to be announced.
Acc-omm(»dations : Reservations for hotel accounnodations must be made in
advance because of housing difficulties. Address all requests for reservations
to New York headquarters of Congress on Civil Rights. For further details,
additional copies of this call and general inquiry, send all communications to :
Congress on Civil Rights, 205 East Forty-second Street, New York 17, N. Y.
Reactionary forces, based on war-rich monopolies, the die-hard union break-
ers, red-baitei-s. and race haters, command the largest surviving fifth column
in the \\orld. They are turning the weapons and methods of fascism against
the American people. They are prepared to destroy our democracy, even to the
establishment of outriglit fascism.
Their program consists of smashing unions through strike provocation,
in.tunctions, and legislation like the Case bill that would wipe out labor gains
of a quarter of a century : spreading discrimination and hatred against
minorities throngh violence against Negro civilians and veterans, partic-
ularly in the South. anti-Semitism and destruction of FEPC ; maintaining
the poll-tax system to defranchise 10,000.0l¥) Negro and white Americans;
sapping the strength of labor and other organizations by using Hitler's prime
weapon of i-ed baiting, esjiecially tlii-ough revival of the Dies committee under
Rankin.
This reactionary program has met the growing organized resistance of the labor
movement and other groups and individuals who believe firmly in democratic
liberties.
The popular response to such campaigns as FEPC and poll-tax repeal shows
that the people will organize. Veterans are fighting discrimination and challeng-
ing the pro-Fascist press. Committees everywliere have sprung up to defend
victims of police and lynch violence: the renewed activity of such Fascist spokes-
men as Gerald L. K. Smith has brought widespread, fighting protests.
Labor has sharply stiffened the defense of its civil rights, and people in all
walks of life are rallying with enthusiasm to labor's defense.
Now more than ever the united action of the democratic forces is needed to
enable ea<h organization and individual to exert maximum effectiveness in the
realizntion of a common program. The elaboration of a campaign or series of
(;s!)70 — .'-,0 — pt. 1 11
152
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
campaigns, coordinated in detail and Nation-wide in scope, is therefore essential
to meet the challenges that today confront us all :
To safeguard and extend all democratic rights, especially the rights of
labor, and of racial, political, religious and national minorities ;
To combat all forms of discrimination against these groups ;
To defend and aid victims of the fight for these rights ;
To fight against domestic fascism and all its forms — Jim Crow, anti-
Semitism, red-baiting, discrimination against the foreign born.
To these ends, we call upon civil rights, labor, religious, interracial, and other
organizations and individuals to attend a congress on civil rights in Detroit
on April 27 and 28, 194(>, to formulate and agree upon a national program to
defeat the offensive of reactionary and Fascist forces, and to consider all steps
required to assure the maximum unification of effort to advance that program.
INITIATING COMMITTEE
Zlatko Balokovic, vice president, Amer-
ican Slav Congress
Elmer A. Benson, chairman, executive
council. National Citizens PAC
]\Iary McLeod P.ethune
Dr. Charlotte Hawkins Brown, presi-
dent. Palmer Institute.
Col. Evans Carlson
Edward Chodorov
Norman Corwin
Julius Emspak, secretary-treasurer,
United Electric, Radio and Machine
Workers, CIO
Jess Fletcher, vice president, Building
Service Employees International
Union, AFL
Chirk Foreman, president. Southern
( '(Uifei-ence for Human Welfare
Carey McWilliams
Rep. Vito Marcantonio, president, In-
ternational Labor Defense
George Marshall, chairman. National
Federation Constitutional Liberties
Dr. Kirtley F. Mather
Dr. Benjamin E. Mays, president, More-
house College
Bishop Edward L. Parsons
James G. Patton, president. National
Farmers Union
Dr. Edwin McNeill Poteat, president,
Colgate-Rochester Divinity School
Paul Robeson
Edward G. Robinson
Wesley E. Sharer, co-chairman, Chicago
Civil Liberties Committee
Prof. John F. Shepard, president, Mich-
igan Civil Rights Federation
Johannes Steel
Donald Ogdeu Stewart
Milton Kaufman, executive secretary
SPONSORS
(Partial list)
Louis Adamic
Meyer Adelman, district director,
United Steelworkers, Milwaukee
Raymond Pace Alexander
James Egert Allen, president, New
York State Conference NAACP
Branches
Rep. Charles W. Anderson, Kentucky
State Legislature
Judge William A. Anderson, Minneapo-
lis
Susan B. Anthony II, secretary, Con-
gress of American Women
Elmer J. F. Arndt, cliairman. Commis-
sion Christion Social Action, Evan-
gelical and Reformed Church
Bishop James C. Baker, Los Angeles
C. B. Baldwin, executive vice president,
National Citizens PAC
Howard Bay, president. United Scenic
Artists Local S29
W. A. Bell, president. Miles College
Lewis Alan Berne, president. Federa-
tion of Architects, Engineers, Chem-
ists and Technicians
Warren K. Billings
Rev. Shelton Hale Bishop, New York
City
Judge Jane M. Bolin, New York City
H. D. Bollinger, secretary. Department
of Student Work, Board of Educa-
tion, Methodist Church
Rev. W. Russel Bowie
Louis E. Burnham, organizing secre-
tary. Southern Negro Youth Congress.
D. A. Cameron, editor. Little, Brown
& Co.
Councilman Charles N. Carr, Cleveland
Del Castle, Ship Scalers Union, local
589
Rose Mae Catchings, president. South-
ern Negro Youth Congress
Prof. Emmanuel Chapman, chairman,
Commission of Catholics for Human
Rights
Dr. Rufus E. Clement, president, At-
lanta University
Dean Nick Comfort, Oklahoma School
of Religion
Philip M. Connelly, secretary, Los An-
geles CIO Council
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVE'STTOATION
153
Councilman Eugene P. Connolly, New
York CMty
A. A. Couch, president, Iowa Federa-
tion of Labor
Julius Crane, vice president. United
Shoe V\'orkers
George W. Crockett. Jr., executive di-
rector. Fair Practices Committee,
UAAV-CIO
Josepli Cun-an, president. National
Maritime Union
Councilman Benjamin J. Davis, Jr.,
New York City
Adolph Dehu
Pep. Hugh De Lacy, Washington
Hon. Earl B. Dickerson, president, Na-
tional Bar Association
Catherine Dunham
Roscoe Dunjee
N. H. Eagle, director of organization.
United Rubber "Workers
Prof. R. D. Feild, Tulane University
Lion Feuchtwanger
Elizabeth Gurley Flynn
Eleanor Fowler, secretary. Congress of
Women's Auxiliaries
Stephen H. Fritchman, editor, Christian
Register
Leo Gallagher, L-os Angeles
.lohn Garfield
Sander Genis, manager. Twin City
Joint Board, Amalgamated Clothing
\\'orkers
Elinor S. Gimbel, New I'^ork City
Leonard Golditch, secretary. National
Committee to Combat Anti-Semitism
Rabbi .Solomon Goldman, Chicago
L. A. Gossett, secretary, Georgia State
CIO Council
Bishop J. A. Gregg, Kansas City, Kans.
Abner Green, secretary, American
Commission for Protection of Foreign
Born
Mel J. Heiuritz, secretary, Wisconsin
State CIO Council
Donald Henderson, president, Food, To-
bacco, Agricultural .md Allied Work-
ers
Rev. Charles A. Hill, president, De-
troit NAACP
James A. Hinton, president, State Con-
ference of NAACP for South Carolina
Langston Hughes
Rev. Kenneth deP. Hughes, president,
Boston NAACP
Hosea Hudson, local president. United
Steel Woi'kers, Bii-mingham
Ralil)i Ferdinand M. Is.serman, chair-
man, Justice and Peace Connnittee,
( entral Conference (tf American Rab-
bis
I>r. I). V. Jemison, jiresident, National
Baptist Convention
1)1-. Kufus M. Jones, Haverford. Pa.
J. F. Jnrich, pie.sident. Internal icnial
Fishej-inen and Allied AA'orkers
Millard Lampell
Ring W. Lardner, Jr.
Kenneth Leslie, edit(>r, The Protestant
A. A. Liveright, executive director,
American Council on Race Relations
Arthur Le Sueur, Duluth, Minn.
Bishop Francis J. McConnell
Prof. Edward W. IMcFarland, president,
IMetropolitan Council FEP, Detroit
O. E. McKaine, secretary. Progressive
Democratic Party, South Carolina
Rev. Jack R. McMichael, secretary,
Methodist Federation for Social
Service
Herbert March, district director,
United Packinghouse Workers, Chi-
cago
Prof. F. O. Matthieson, Harvard Uni-
versity
Sannxel D. Menin, Denver, Colo.
Lewis Merrill, president, United OflEice
and Professional Workers
Saul Mills, secretary, New York CIO
Council
Dr. George S. Mitchell, director. Vet-
erans Service, Southern Regional
Council
J. I'. IMooney, organizer, Textile Work-
ers Union, Bessemer, Ala.
Morris Muster, president, United Fur-
niture Workers
Tom Neill, executive secretary. Serv-
icemen's and Veterans' Welfare Com-
mittee, UERWMA
Josephine Nordstrand, secretary, Wis-
consin State Conference on Social
Legislation
Grant W. Oakes, president, United Fai'm
Equipment and Metal Workers
Rep. Ellis E. Patterson, California
Boyd E. Payton. president, Virginia
State CIO Council
Dr. Charles A. Petioni, chairman. West
Indies National Council
Terry Pettus, president, Washington
State CIO-PAC
Irving Potash, manager. Furriers Joint
Council, New Y'ork
Rep. Adam Clayton Powell, Jr., New
York City
Lee Pressman, general counsel, Con-
gressman of Industrial Organizations
Councilman Michael J. Quill, president,
Transport Workers Union
Thomas C. Rabbitt, Washington State
senator
Mervyn Rathborne, secretary, Califor-
nia State CIO Council
Prof. Walter Rautenstrauch, Columbia
University
Earl Robinson
Reid Robinson, president. International
Union, Mine, Mill and Smelter Work-
ers
Dorothy K. Roosevelt, executive secre-
tary, Michigan Citizens Committee
Rep. William A. Rowan. Illinois
Rep. Charles R. Savage, Washington
154 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
William Jay Schieffelin Senator Glen H. Taylor, Idaho
Prof. A. M. Sclilesinger, Harvard Uni- ReiJ. Donald C. Teigland, Illinois State
versity Legislature
Artur Schnabel W. E. Tucker, president, Local 157, In-
Prof. Frederick L. Schuman, Williams ternational Union of Brewery Work-
College ers, Dallas, Tex.
Joseph P. Selly, president, American Prof. Ralph E. Wager, Emory Univer-
Communications Association sity
Henry R. Silberman, executive director, Dr. Harry F. Ward
New England Division, American Courtney D. Ward, secretary. Painters
Jewish Congress District Council, Cleveland
Charles N. Smolikoff, director, Florida Max Weber
State CIO Council Lulu P.. White, secretary, Houston,
Herbert K. Sorrell, president, Confer- Tex., NAACP
ence of Studio Unions, AFL Rev. Claude C. Williams, director. Peo-
Christina Stead pie's Institute of Applied Religion
Max Sein, secretary, Cincinnati CIO James H. Wolfe, Justice, State Su-
Council prenie (Jourt, Utah
A. E. Stevenson, secretary, Cleveland Bishop R. R. Wright, Jr., secretary,
CIO Council Fraternal Council of Negro Churches
Prof. Dirk J. Struik, Massachusetts In- Dr. Max Yergan. president. National
stitute of Technology Negro Congress
Gleiui J. Talbott, president. North Da- Jack Zeller, educational director, UAW-
kota Farmers Union CIO
Note. — Organizations listed for identification only.
Exhibit 41
Schuman signs this.
April 7, 1948.
A Statement of American Educators
As American educators, we are much disturbed by one of the byproducts of the
Presidential "loyalty order" — the listing of a number of schools as "subversive"
organizations by the Attorney General of the United States. The charge that
these schools "appear" to be "adjuncts of the Communist Party" could be made
against any institution that teaches Marxism, and could thus always be used as
a device for labeling Marxist teaching subversive.
We may or may not believe in Marxist schools. Catholic schools, single-tax
schools, or any other schools with particular social outlooks. We are alarmed
that any official of the American Government assumes the power officially to
proclaim the teaching and study of an economic philosophy to be subversive.
We believe that every group — including Marxists — has the right, under the
American Constitution, to teach and propagate its ideas, and that students,
whether they are Marxists or not, have the right to study Marxism and to judge
for themselves the validity of its teachings. If this right can be denied by
arbitrary government fiat — in the sense that teaching at or attending a school
where such ideas are taught is declared "subversive" — then similarly any other
ideas not approved by those in power can as readily be stifled.
We recognize, for example, that the Jefferson School of Social Science in New
York is, in its teaching of the social sciences, avowedly Marxist. It operates as
an independent institution under its board of trustees, and clearly defines its edu-
cational objectives and organization in its bulletins. Whatever one might think
of Marxism as a method or a body of doctrine, it is clear that the action of the
Attorney General in stigmatizing such institutions as "subversive," esiiecially
without hearing or trial, represents an extremely dangerous step in the direction
of thought control and the institution of thought police. If Marxist schools can
be declared subversive, then social science teachers who assign Marxist materials
or express Marxist views may quickly be sultjected to the same label. Freedom
of inquiry will be gravely imperiled.
The President's Commission on Higher Education for American Democracy
(December 15, 11)47) has ably stated : "The social i-ole of education in a democratic
society is at once to insure equal liberty and equal opportunity to differing indi-
viduals and groups, and to enable the citizens to understand, appraise, and re-
direct foi-ces, men, and events as these tend to strengthen or to weaken their
liberties."
STATE DEPART-MENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 155
111 this spirit, we ask that the President of the United States and the Attorney
GeiUM-al withdiaw tlie blacklist of Marxist and labor educational institutions, as
repusnaut to uur national ideal of freedom of thought.
SIGNKUS OF STATEMENT OF AMERICAN EDUCATORS
Professor Institution (for identification only)
Thonias Addis Stanford University.
Edward S. Allan Iowa State College.
Ku>seII Ames Queens College.
Earl Maynard Aris Albion College.
Francis ^I. Harbour Southern Illinois University.
Fred Asa P>arnes Cornell (retired).
Ralph P.eals University of California at Los Angeles.
Edward IMberinan.
Leonard lUoomfield Yale University.
Cornelius P.ol Stanford (retired).
Earl C. Bowman De Pauw University
Lyman K. Bradley 1 New York University.
Theodore Brameld Do.
Joseph Bressler Brooklyn College.
Dorothy Brewster Columbia University.
John Bridge City College of New York.
Arthur G. Brodeur University of California.
Charles N. Brooks Harvard University.
William B. Bryan Macalester College, Minnesota.
Edwin Berry Burgum New York University.
John L. Buys St. Lawrence University.
Robert Chambers Ts^ew York University (retired).
Charles M. Child Stanford University.
Edith F. Claflin Columbia University.
Edwin L. Clarke Rollins College.
Will.son L. Coates Sarah Lawrence College.
M. Robert Cobbledick Connecticut College.
Joseph W. Cohen University of Colorado.
Philip W. L. Cox New York University.
Oliver C. Cox Tuskegee Institute.
Grace L. Coyle Western Re.serve University.
Abraham Cronbach Hebrew Union College.
Dean W. C. Curtis University of Missouri (emeritus).
John J. De Boer University of Illinois.
Haii Dougla.ss Director, School of Education, University
of Colorado.
H. M. Doutt University of Akron.
Arnold Dresden Swarthmore College.
W. E. B. DuBois National Association for the Advancement
of Colored People.
Lyford-P. Edwards Bard College.
Franklin Edgerton Yale Law School.
Thomas D. Eliot Northwestern University.
Albert I. Elkus '_ University of California.
Thomas I. Emer.son Yale University.
Bergen Evans Northwestern University.
Frederic Ewen Brooklyn College.
Henry Pratt Fairchild New York University.
Philip S. Foner Jefferson School.
Abraham Edel City College of New York.
Frances A. Foster Vassar College.
Royal W. France Rollins College.
Harold A. Freeman ]\Iassachu.setts Institute of Technology.
Reirinald F. French Amherst College.
Henrietta V. Friedman Hunter College.
Wendell H. Fuiiy Harvard University.
David R. Goodard University of Pennsylvania.
Erwin R. Goodenough Yale University.
Ralph H. Gundlach University of Washington.
Calvin S. Hall Western Reserve University.
156 STATE DEPARTMETnT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY IN\^ESTIGATTON
SIGNEKS OF STATEMENT OF AMERICAN EDUCATORS Continued
Professor Institution (for identification onlyi
Victor E. Hall Stanford University.
R. Travis Hardaway Queens College.
Harrison Harley Simmons College.
Virginia Harlow De Pauw University.
Robert .J. Havighurst University of Chicago.
Harold Haydon I>o. ^ ^. . ,. , ^. t^
G A Hedger TTniversity of Cincinnati (retired).
virgii B Heltzel Northwestern University.
J Allen Hickerson New Haven State Teachers College.
Philip M. Hicks Swarthmore.
Ernest R. Hilgard Stanford University.
Stefan Hirsch Bard College.
Harry Hoijer University of California at Los Angeles.
Hamilton Holt President, Rollins College.
H-irold Hotelling University of North Carolina.
Abbott G. Houk St. Lawrence University.
Abbott Kaplan University of California at Los Angeles
Forrest M. Keen Heidelberg College.
Raymond Kennedy Yale.
Walter B. Keighton Swarthmore.
C. Wendell King Rollins College.
Paul Kirkpatrick Stanford University.
Samuel Kliger D"ke University.
John L Kolehmainen Heidelberg College
Luther P. .Jackson Virginia State College.
William .Taffe Northwestern University.
Hirold N Lee Tulane University.
Paul L. Lehmann Princeton Theological Seminary.
Norman Levinson Mass. Institute of Technology.
Alton A. Lindsey. .. .p ^ , ^
Gerhard Loose University of Colorado.
Chaplain Sidnev Lovett Yale.
Robert S. Lynd Columbia ^
Curtiss MacDougall Northwestern University.
Npw MTclMiiiri i-'O.
Wilfred H. MainwVring"7_V__ Stanford University (emeritus).
Lutlier B. Marchant Mills College.
Jphn M. Marsalka Yale.
F O. Matthiessen Harvard Umjersity.
Wesley H. Maurer University of Michigan.
HeSry K McCnntock University of Minnesota Law School.
V.J. McGill. ^^ ,. ^ „
J F. Mack Oberlin College.
Kirtlev F. Mather Harvard.
Clyde Miller Columbia.
Frmim Mills De Pauw University.
Julii Neely Southern Illinois University.
Arthur H Nethercot Northwestern University.
Robert HasnngrSic'hols Union Theological Seminary (emeritus).
F. S. C. Northrop Yale.
Michael Pargment University of Michigan.
Ralph Barton Perry Harvard (emeritus).
John P. Peters New Haven, Conn.
PjIiHi Plillins Swarthmore.
wlr lert T ™^^ - l^"iversity of Washington.
?^\^-Ji^n":::::::::::-—. romona CoHege (enxeritus).
Walter Rautenstrauch Columbia (emeritus).
Tra De \ Reid Atlanta University.
George F.' Reynolds University of Colorado (emeritus).
Sarah R. Riedman Brooklyn College.
RAvnnvfl P Riess Hiiuter College.
Holland Robust:::::::::: California Labor School.
Theodore Rosebury Columbia University.
STATE DEPARTMETSTT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVEiSTIGATION 157
SIGNERS OF STATEMENT OF AMEatlCAN EDUCATORS — Continued
Professor Institution (for identification only)
Alt'xancler Sandow' New York University.
Marpiret Schlanch Do.
FrtnU'rick I^. Scluuuan Williams College.
Agnt-r H. Schroeder Western Reserve University.
Walter Sliz Swarthmore.
Harry Slochower ^__. Brooklyn College.
William C. Smith Linfleld College.
Willand Smith Mills College.
James D. Sorher Swarthmore.
Bertha K. Stavrianos lioosevelt College of Chicago.
Bernard J. Stern Columbia.
Dirk .7. Struik Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Ernest L. Talbert University of Cincinnati.
\\'illiain('tta C. Thomson Syracuse University.
Miriam D. Thompkins Columbia.
Charles Triukaus Sarah Lawrence College.
William Lewis Troyer Albion College.
Kexford Guy Tugwell University of Chicago.
Colston E. Warne Amherst College.
Edward K. Weaver Alabama State Teachers College.
David L. Webster Stanford University.
Charles H. Wesley President, Wilberforce University.
Louis Weisner Hunter College.
F. W. Weymouth Stanford University.
George F. Whicher Amherst College.
Samuel K. Workman Noi'thwestern University.
Henry N. Wieman University of Chicago.
Edward H. Zabriskie Rutgers University.
Thomas Woody University of Pennsylvania.
Eugene C. Holmes Howard University.
Stuart Mudd University of Pennsylvania Medical School.
Exhibit 42
To Honor a Great American on the Third Anniversary of His Courageous
Launching of the Fight for Peace
You are cordially invited to join us in honoring Henry A. Wallace, a great
leader and a wonderful human being at a dinner, at the Hotel Astor, New York
City, Monday evening, September 12, 1949, at 7 o'clock.
Convert: .$10 — dress optional.
R. S. V. P. .
Ted O. Thackrey, Dinner Chairman.
Three years ago, a man of courage and principle and great concern for his
fellow man raised his voice against what he regarded as a betrayal of the people.
His conscience aflame, he spoke up, at Madison Square Garden, on September
12, li)46, against the drift away from the Roosevelt path of peace and cooperation.
He did this at great personal sacrifice. .Just as 2 years earlier when his
denunciation of Jim Crow at the Democratic National Convention cost him the
Presidency, so now his .Jeremiah-like warning led inevitably to his resignation
from the Cabinet a few days later.
On that September 12, Henry A. Wallace launched, and has since led with
magnificent integrity, the resistance movement that has given organized ex-
pression to the peace forces of America. Some day this movement will be judged
in true perspective and all who have participated in it will have reason to
be proud.
Funds from this dinner will be used to further Mr. Wallace's great work as the
leader of the Progressive Party.
158
STATE DEPARTME'XT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY IKA-ESTIGATIOX
John Abt
Jacob L. Aisenberg
Helen L. Alfred
Oliver S. Allen
Irving Andors
Robenia Antliiniy
I. Duke Avnet
Homer Ayres
C. B. Baldwin
Verda Barnes
Prof. Cyrns P. Barnum
Mrs. Moses Barron
Dr. Edward K. Barsky
Henry Beitscher
Dr. Vincent Bellaflore
David Beloff
Elmer A. Benson
Irving Berke
]Mrs. Irving Berke
^'ictor Bernstein
Walter Bernstein
Edwin Bjorkman
Dr. Algernon Black
Morton Bloom
Millen Brand
I'rof. Dorothy Brewster
Harry Bridges
Hngh Bryson
Harold Bnchman
Dr. Robert K. Burns
Rev. Dudley H. Bnrr
Dr. Allan M. Butler
Angus Cameron
Dr. Ulysses Campbell
Dr. John E. T. Camper
Herman Cherry
Jerome Chodorov
John M. Coe
Louis Cohen
Charles A. Collins
Fannie Cook
Israel Cramer
DIXAER SPONSORS
Prof. Thomas I. Emerson
Lion Feui-htwanger
Frederick Y. Field
Thomas Fitzpatrick
Russell H. Fluent
Clark Foreman
Clemens J. France
Lew Frank, Jr.
Patricia Murphy Frank
I>rof. Mitchell Franklin
Jr. Dr. Richard A. Freedman
Dr. Asa B. Friedman
Paul J. Kern
Charles M. Kerns, Jr.
Dr. John A. Kingsbnrv
Hannah Kirtz
Harry G. Kriegel
Leo Krzycki
Corliss Lamont
Millard Lampell
Marjorie Lansing
Karly Larsen
John La Touche
Arthur Laurents
Rev. Stephen II. FritchmanJames D. Le Cron
William S. Gailmor
Mrs. William S. Gailmor
Zalmon Garfield
A. J. Gelb
Zina Getmansky
Elinor S. Gimbel
Kaye Ginsberg
J. W. Gitt
Mrs. J. W. Gitt
Ben Gold
Fred F. Gold
B. Z. Goldberg
Mrs. Louis Goldburt
^Minnie Golden
Sanford L. Goldman
Dr. Samuel M. (ioodman
Esther Lowe Gordon
Jack Greenbaum
William Gropiier
Ewart G. Guinier
Uta Hagen
Vincent Hallinan
Mrs. Vincent Hallinan
Dashiel Hammett
E. Y. Harburg
Mrs. E. Y. Harburg
Dr. Fowler Harper
Dr. Marion Hathway
Dorothy Haven
Prof. Henry W. Longfellow Lillian Hellman
Dana
Francis Danowski
Zoltan Deak
John J. DeBoer
Hugh De Lacy
Raymond Dennis
Freda Diamond
Harry L. Diehl
Martha Dodd
Dr. Barnet Dorwitt
Olin Downes
Muriel Draper
Paul Draper
Mrs. Paul Draper
Benjamin Dreyfus
Dr. W. E. B. DuBois
Prof. Barrows Dunham
James H. Durkin
Arnaud d'Usseau
Dr. Lewis A. Eldridge, Jr.
Kvrle Elkin
Dr. Robert H. Ellis
Donald Henderson
Erma L. Henderson
Edith Weil Hertz
Rev. Charles A. Hill
Ira A. Hirschmann
Charles P. Howard
Leo LIuberman
Canada Lee
Ray Lev
Grace K. Liebman
Irma Lindheim
Seymour Linfleld
Alice F. Liveright
Stan Loney
Michael Loring
Dr. Oliver S. Loud
Thomas Ludwig
Prof. Curtis D.
MacDougall
Bernard Z.
McGrogart.v
John T. McManus
Mary Cabot Macy
Albert Maltz
Vito Marcantonio
James Martin
John Martin
Winfred L. Martin-
dale
Mary Bacon Mason
Prof. F. O. Matthiessen
Dr. Leo Mayer
Mrs. Leo Mayer
Rev. William Howard
Melish
Arthur Miller
Clyde R. Miller
William H. Miller .
Dimitri Mitro-
poulos
Mrs. Albert Mizzy
Thomas G. Moore
Elizabeth Moos
Jacob Moscowitz
Rev. Kenneth deP. HughesStanley Moss
James Imbrie
Jeremiah C. Ingersoll
Minneola P. Ingersoll
Leo Isacson
Rev. J. yuinton Jackson
Crockett Johnson
Walter *1 Johnson
Alvin Jones
Dr. Harry Joseph
Robert Joseph.v
Mrs. Robert Josephy
Elinor Kahn
Manya Kahn
Rockwell Kent
Rev. Arthur W.
Moulton
Russell Nixon
Grant W. Oakes
Walter O'Brien
Jerry J. O'Connell
Ernest Thor Olson
Orville Olson
Harry C. Oppenheimer
Mrs. Harry C. Oppen-
heimer
Sona Osato
Estelle Massey Osborne
Arthur Osman
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
159
Dr. Lionel Ovesey
Meyer Parodneck
Ivobert Tattersoii
Dr. Linus Pauling
William Ponnock
Jennings I'erry
Nels Peterson
Morris Pi/.er
Ely Pollack
A. L. Ponierantz
Martin Popper
Prof. Edward A. Post
George Provost
Harry Ragozin
Mrs. Harry Ragozin
Willard B. Ransom
Bernard Reswick
Libby Holman Reynolds
Dr. John G. Rideout
Paul Robeson
Eslanda Goode Robeson
Col. Raymond Robins
Earl Robinson
Reid Robinson
Sidney Roger
O. John Rogge
Harold J. Rome
Dr. Samuel Rosen
Mrs. Samuel Rosen
Paul L. Ross
Norman Rosten
Dr. John F. Rutledge
Lee Sabinson
Dr. Artur Schnabel
Prof. Frederick L.
Schuman
Arthur Schutzer
Dr. Benianiin Segal
Joseph P. Selly
Theodore Shapiro
Agnes Smedley
Dr. Randolph B. Smith
Raphael Soyer
Mrs. Lawrence D. Steefel
Johannes Steel
Boris R. Steinberg
Alfred K. Stern
I. F. Stone
Fred W. Stover
Frieda Strassler
Dr. Dirk J. Struik
Paul M. Sweezy
Helen Tamiris
Dr. I. M. Tarlov
Dr. Alva W. Taylor
Mandel A. Terman
P. Frankel Thau
Jacob Turner ^
Mrs. Jacob Turner
Jerry Tyler
Exhibit 43
Elsie II. Tyndale
Louis Untermeyer
Mary Van Kleeck
Katherine Van Orden
Craig Vincent
William Vulcan
Dr. Alexander J.
Walker
Courtney Ward
Dr. Harry F. Ward
Alice H. Ware
( 'loldie Watson
Dr. William H. Watts
Max Weber
Dr. Gene Weltfish
Mrs. Louis Wender
Prof. Frank W. Wey-
mouth .
Rev. Eliot White
Mrs. Eliot White
Henry Willcox
Mrs. Henry Willcox
James Waterman Wise
Bert Witt
Alexander Wright
Herman Wright
George Wuchnich
Coleman Young
Joseph Zwillinger
Mrs. Joseph Zwillinger
[Bureau of Acartpmic Freedom. National Council of the Arts. Sciences, and Professions,
49 West Forty-fourth Street. New York 18 (Johanna Grant)]
For relea.se Tuesday, March 1, 1949.
One HrxDRED and Fifty Leadi.xg Educators Call for Reinstatement of
Unr^rsity of Washington Professors
letters to dr. ALLEN CALLS FIRINGS THREAT TO ENTIRE EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM
One hundred and fifty educational leaders from more than .oO colleges and
universities throughout the country have urged Dr. Raymond Allen, president of
the University of Washington, to reinstate with full rights of tenure the 3
professors recently discharged from the university for membership in or "am-
biguous relationship to" the Communist Party in a letter released today (Tuesday)
by the Bureau of Academic Freedom of the National Council of the Arts, Sciences,
and Professions.
Dr. Christian Gauss, dean emeritus of Princton University; Prof. L. C. Dunn
of Columbia University ; Dr. L. B. Arguimbau, of the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology; i:>r. Howard Mumford Jones, of Harvard University; and Prof.
Robert Chambers, of New York T'niversity. are among the signers of the letter
which characterizes the firings as a "shocking repudiation" of the principles of
democracy and academic freedom.
Otlier signatures to the letter, which has also been sent to the board of
regents of the University of Washington, include: Dr. David Haber, Yale Law
School : Prof. Colston Warne, Amherst College ; Dr. Harl R. Douglass, director of
the ('i)llege of Education, University of Colorado; Dr. Frank W. Weymouth,
Stanford University; Prof. Joseph F. Fletcher, Episcopal Theological School,
Cambridge; Dr. W. C. H. Prentice of Swarthmore College; Dr. I. M. KolthofC,
University of Minne.sota: and Dr. T. W. Reese, Mount Holyoke College.
Following is the complete text of the letter, released by Dr. Clyde R. Miller,
director of the NCASP Bureau on Academic Freedom :
"The principle that every citizen has a right to his personal lieliefs and as.so-
clations and to voluntary participation in the affairs of the community is funda-
mental to the traditional American concepts of democracy and academic freedom.
160 STATE DIEPARTME'NT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
"The recent decision of the University of Washington to dismiss three faculty
members on the basis of membership in the Communist Party, or on the premise
of "guilt by association," is a shocking repudiation of this principle. If these
dismissed professors are not reinstated, the result will be irreparable damage to
all educational institutions and particularly to the University of Washington.
"The university's action, if it is not swiftly reversed, will se*" a precedent for
the dismissal of any instructor for any personal beliefs and associations.
"As educators, deeply concerned for our nwn civil rights and t'^^ose of our fellow
citizens, and cognizant of the further implications of this action as a threat to
our entire educational system, we urge the immediate reinstatement, with full
rights of tenure, of the dismissed professors, Phillips, Butterworth, and
Gundlach."
List of other professors whose names appear on the statement are attached.
Signers of Statement to President Allen of the University of Washingtok
(Universities and colleges listed for identification purposes only)
Dr. M. H. Abrariis, Cornell University. Dr. W. E. B. DuBois, Council on African
Dr. Vaughn S. Albertsou, Vanport Col- Affairs.
lege. Dr. Barrows Dunham, Temple Univer-
Dr. Gordon Allport, Harvard Univer- sity.
sity. Dr. L. C. Dunn, Columbia University.
Dr. Kurt Anderson, Bennington Col- Dr. Henry Pratt Fairchild, New York
lege. University.
Prof. L. B. Arguimbau, Massachusetts Dr. I. Fankuchen, Polytechnic Insti-
Institute of Technology. tute of Brooklyn.
Dr. Albert F. Ax, Harvard University. Dr. Harold Feldman, Cornell Univer-
Dr. Bernard Baum, University of sity.
Iowa. Dr. Leon Festinger, University of
Dr. Paul H. Baurnan, University of Michigan.
Louisville. Dr. Mary Jo Fink, University of Louis-
Dr. Carter Bechtel, University of Louis- ville.
ville. Dr. Joseph J. Firebaugh, University of
Dr. Albert J. Becker, Western Reserve Florida.
University. Dr. William H. Fisher, Eastern Wash-
Dr. Robert O. Blood, Jr., William Penn ington College.
College. Prof. Joseph P. Fletcher, Episcopal
Prof. Henry Blumberg, Ohio State Uni- Theological School.
versity. Dr. G. L. Foster, Columbia University.
Dr. Bart J. Bok, Harvard Observatory. Dr. Frank S. Freeman, Cornell Uni-
Edith Keene Bower, American Asso- versity.
elation for Adult Education. Dr. Stanley Friedman, Western Reserve
Dr. Theodore Brameld, New York Uni- University.
versity. Dr. Wendell Furry, Harvard University.
Dr. Louise Fargo Brown, Vassar Col- Dr. Morris E. Garnsey, University of
lege. Colorado.
Dr. Robert Winzer Bruce, Lyndon Dr. Christian Gauss, Princeton Univer-
Teachers College. sity.
Dr. Edith Burnett. Smith College. Dr. Josephine M. Gleason, Vassar Col-
Dr. Robert C. Challman, Menninger lege.
Foundation. Dr. Alma Goetsch, Michigan State Col-
Dr. Robert Chambers, New York Uni- lege.
versity. Dr. Irving Goodman, University of Col-
Dr. M. M. Chatterjee, Antioch College. orado.
Dr. George B. Collins, University of Dr. M. Goodman, Western Reserve
Rochester. Universitv.
Prof Alfred Crofts, University of Den- ^v. David Ilaber, Yale.
yer. Dr. William Haller. .Jr.. University of
Prof. John J. DeBoer, University of Massachusetts.
Illinois Prof. Fowler Harper, Yale Law School.
Dr. IMarion DeRonde, Smith College. Dr. Frederick P. Harris, Western Re-
Dr. Malcolm Dole, Northwestern Uni- serve University.
versity. Dr. Mary Hemle, New School for Social
Dr. Harl R. Douglass, University of Research.
Colorado.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 161
Dr. Nicliolas Hobbs, Colunibiii Univer- Dr. Otto Natlian, New York University.
sity. Dr. Wesley Osterberg, Western Reserve
Dr. Lee Elbert Holt, American Inter- University.
national College. Dr. Erwin Panofsky, Institute for Ad-
Dr. Lloyd U. liuniplireys, Stanford Uni- vanced Study.
versity. Dr. Melber Phillips, Brooklyn College.
Dr. W. llurewicz, Massachusetts Insti- Dr. Dale Pontius, Roosevelt College.
tute of Technology. Dr. W. C. H. Prentice, Swarthmore
Dr. Kobert Iglehart, New York Univer- College.
sity. Dr. Claire F. Rabo, Western Reserve
Dr. Otto Jelinek, (Jrinnell College. University.
Dr. Howard Muniford Jones, Harvard Mr. Walter Rautonstrauch.
University. Dr. Peter L. Rabe, Western Reserve
Dr. Mervin Jules, Smith College. University.
Dr. Daniel Katz. University of Michi- Dr. T. W. Reese, Mount Holyoke Col-
s:>n. lege.
Dr. Noble H. Kelley, University of Louis- Dean Geraldine Richard, Chandler
ville. School.
Dr. John C. Kennedy, Oberlin College. Dr. Walter B. Rideout, Harvard Univer-
Dr. George R. Kernodle, University of sitv.
^"^^"'*- Dr. Bernard F. Riess, Hunter College.
Dr. Philliiv Klein, New York School of Mr. Holland Robert. California Labor
Social Work. School.
Dr. Ellis Kolehin. Columbia University. Dr. Milton Rokeach, Michigan State
Dr. I. M. Kolthoff, University of Miune- Colleo"e.
i^ota. Pi-of cufford P. Rowe, Pacific Univer-
Dr. Oliver W. I^rkin, Smith College. gj^-y
Dr. Douglas H. Lawrence, Yale Uni- Dr. Sevmour B. Sarason, Yale Univer-
versity. j,ity /
Dr. Ronald B. Levy, Roosevelt College. Dr. "s. Stansfeld Sargent, Columbia
Dr. Gardner Lindzey, Harvard Univer- University.
^it-^'- ^ ^ Dr. T. C. Schneirla, American Museum
Dr. Bert James Loewenberg, Sarah Law- ^^ Natural History.
rence College. , ^ , ^ , ^ Dr. Waldo' Schumacher, University of
Dr. Helen Morrell Lynd, Sarah Law- Oregon
rence College. „ , , ^, , Dr. Frederick L. Schuman, Williams
Dr. Solomon Machover, Brooklyn Col- Colleo-e
^ ^^f^ ... ., • .. ^.r- .■ r>r. Witliam R. Sears, Cornell Univer-
Dr. Gorman Maier, L niversity of Michi- .^
T.^^\'V T ,r ^, 1, TT • -4. Dr. Theodore Shedlevsky, Rockefeller
Dr. F. L. Marcuso, Cornell University. Institute
Dr. S. E. Margolin. University of Louis- ^^^ Henry W. Shelton, La Jolla, Calif.
I, ^V V Ar Ar „ A- , TT • -^ Dr. B. dthanel Smith, University of
Prof. J. M. Marsalka, Yale University. Illinois
Dr R. E. Marshak, University of Ro- ^ ^ Bi-ewster Smith, Harvard Uni-
^'^^^^*'^"- versitv
Di-. (Jlenn C. Martin, Santa Monica City j^^ Randolph B. Smith, New York City.
Lo.itge ^ ,, ^, „ , r- • Dr. P. A. Serekin, Harvard University.
Prof. Kirtley F. Mather, Harvard I ni- ^^, ^^^^ Stagner, University of Illinois.
Di- 'r (rMatthies.son, Harvard Univer- ^'■.^- J" Stauverman, Emery Univer-
T-w :/ 1 T AT T 11- A.- V ..1 Dr. Bernhard J. Stern, Columbia Uni-
Dr. Samuel J. McT>aughlin, New York .:
Universitv versity.
Dr. Alice McNiff, New York University. J^l'^'^P^! ^^ ^^r^^M ^' m J'JnlSIn« Tn
Dr. Willis B. Merriam, State College ^\^'l^ l' r^^T \ ^t^^^^^^"^^"s In-
of W-mhiiK'toii stitntP of Technology.
Dr! Ad:/!.!, E. Mever, New York Uni- ^r. Edward A. Suchman, Cornell Uni-
versitv ' versity.
Prof. Otto Meyerhof, University of Dr^ Ralph B. Tower, West Virginia
Pennsylvania. University.
Dr. Uul.v Turner IVIorris, VassaV Col- Dr. Charles Trinkhaus, Sarah Lawrence
le^re College.
Dr. Philip Morrison, Cornell Uni- Dr. Ralph H. Turner, Oberlin College.
versity. Dr. Robert Ulich, Harvard University.
Dr. George A. Muench, University of Dr. J. Van der Zee, State University of
Louisville. Iowa.
162
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
Dr. T. W. Van Metre, Columbia Univer-
sity.
Dr. George B. Vetter, New York City.
Dr. John Voll^mann, Mount Holyoke Col-
lege.
Dr. Herbert Weisinger, Institute for
Advanced Study.
Dr. Louis Weisner, Hunter College.
Dr. Gene Weltfish, Columbia University.
Dr. Frank W. Weymouth, Stanford
University.
(Partial list as of February 21, 1949.)
Dr. Paul L. Whitely, Franklin and
Marshall.
Dr. Maxine Wolfenstein, Western Re-
serve University.
Dr. Thomas Woody, University of
Pennsylvania.
Prof. Colston E. Warne, Amherst Col-
lege.
Dr. Thomas I. Emerson, Yale Law
School.
Exhibit 44
Culture and the Crisis
an open letter to the writers, artists, teachers, physicians, engineers,
scientists, and other professional workers of america
League of Professional Groups for Foster and Ford
In October this group was organized as the League of Professional Groups
for Foster and Ford. An editorial committee was appointed and instructed to
expand the original statement into a 10,000-word open letter, and publish it as
an election pamphlet. This pamphlet is now issued under the title of "Culture
and the Crisis."
Leonie Adams
Sherwood Anderson
Newton Arvin
Emjo Basshe
Maurice Becker
Slater Brown
Fielding Burke
Erskine Caldwell
Robert Cant well
Winifred L. Cliappell
Lester Cohen
l<ouis Colman
Lewis Corey
Henry Cowell
Malcolm Cowley
Bruce Crawford
Kyle S. Crichton
Countee Cullen
H. W. L. Dana
Adolf Dehn
John Dos Passos
Howard N. Doughty, .Jr.
Miriam Allen De Ford
^^'aldo Frank
Alfred Frueh
Murray Godwin
Eugene Gordon
Horace Gregory
Louis Grudin
John Herrmann
Granville Hicks
Sidney Hook
Sidney Howard
Langston Hughes
Orrick Johns
William X. Jones
Matthew Josephson
Alfred Kreymborg
Louis Lozowick
Grace Lumpkin
P'elix Morrow
Samuel Ornitz
James Rorty
Isidor Schneider
Frederick L. Schuman
Edwin Seaver
Herman Simpson
Lincoln Steffens
Charles Walker
Robert Whitaker
Edmund Wilson
Ella Winter
Five cents per copy ; $1 for 25 ; $3.50 for 100.
Send orders to League of Professional Groups for Foster and Ford, 35 East
Twelfth Street, New York City,
Exhibit 45
List of Officers and Members of the National Citizens Political Action
Committee, as Submitted to the Committee on Campaign Expenditures of
the House of Representatives in the Last Week of August 1944. An In-
complete List Was Published in the Daily Worker of July 15, 1944
officers
Hon. George W. Norris, honorary chair-
man
Hon. Sidne.y Hillman, chairman
Hon. James G. Patton, vice chairman
Hon. Freda Kirchwey, vice chairman
Hon. R. J. Thomas, treasurer
Hon. James H. McGill, comptroller
Hon. Clark Foreman, secretary
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 163
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
Verda White Barnes Freda Kirrhwey James G. Patton
Elmer A. Benson Janu's Ldeb Gifford I'iiK-hot
Van A. Bittner Lncy Ranilolph INlasou R. J. Thomas
Qark Foreman James H. McGill Dr. Robert C. Weaver
Sidney Hillnian I'hilip Murray A. F. Whitney
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE
Adamic. Louis, author, Milford, N. J.
Alexander, Dr. Will W., vice president, Julius Rosenwald Fund, North Carolina
Anderson, Mary, former Director, Women's Bureau, Department of Labor, Wash-
ington, D. C.
.\nderson, Mrs. Sherwood, New York City
Baldwin, ('. B., assistant chairman, CIO Political Action Committee, New York
Balokovic, Zlatko, president. United Committee of South Slavic Americans, New
York
Barnes, Verda White, director, women's division, CIO Political Action Commit-
tee, New York
Bauer, Catherine, author, California
Benet, William Rose, poet, New York
Benson, Elmer A., ex-Governor, Minnesota
Bethune. Mary McLeod CMrs.), Daytona Beach, Fla.
Biffsert, Robert (Mrs.), Winnetka, 111.
Bittner, Van A., United Steelworkers of America, Washington, D. C.
Blaine, Emmons (Mrs.), Chicago, 111.
Bliven. Bruce, editor. New Republic, New l^'ork
Boas, Dr. Ernst P., New York City
Bowie, Dr. W. Russell, professor. Union Theological Seminary, New York
Bremer, Otto, banker, St. Paul. Minn.
Bunr'.ick, Zarko M . president. Serbian Vidovdas Congress, Akron, Ohio
Burke, J. Frank. Pasadena, Calif.
Butkovich, John D., president, Croatian Fraternal Union, Pennsylvania
Cai-ey, James B., secretary-treasurer, Congress of Industrial Organizations,
Washington, D. C.
Clyde, Ethel (Mrs.), Huntington, Long Island
Coinielly, ^larc, Los Angeles, Calif.
Cooke, Morris Llewellyn, consulting engineer, Philadelphia, Pa.
Coolidge, Albert Sprague, professor. Harvard University, Massachusetts
Corrothers. Rev. S. L., president, National Nonpartisan Colored Ministers Asso-
ciation, U. S. A., Westbury, Long Island
Curran. Joseph, president. National Maritime Union of America, New York
Dalrymitle, Sh»rnian H., president. United Itubber Workers of America, Ohio
Davis. Dr. Michael M., editor. Medical Care, New York
Dombrowski, Dr. James A., executive secretary. Southern Conference for Human
Welfare, Tennessee
Dun.lee. Roscoe,'editor and publisher, the Black Dispatch, Oklahoma
Dul'ont, Ethel, writer, Kentucky
DuPont, Zara, Cambridge, Mass.
Durr, Clifford (Mrs.), vice chairman, National Committee to Abolish the Poll
Tax. Virginia
Eliot, Thomas H., attorney, Cambridge, Mass.
Emliree, Edwin R., president, Julius Rosenwald Fund, Illinois
Epstein. Henry, attorney. New York City
Fitzgerald. Albert J., president, United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers
of America, New York.
Foreman, Clark, president. Southern Conference for Human Welfare
Frazier. Dr. E. Franklin, professor of sociology, Howard University, Washing-
ton, D. C. •" o
Galbraith, John Kenneth, editorial department. Fortune Magazine
Ginibel, Elinor, Committee for the Care of Young Children in Wartime, New
York Cit.v.
Green. John, president. Marine and Shipbuilding Workers of America, New Jersey
Gufknecht. John, judge. municii)al court. Chicago, 111.
Harburg. E. Y.. motion picture director, Hollywood. Calif
Hastie AVilliam. judge, dean, Howard Law School, Washington, D C
Hays, Mortimer, attorney, New York City.
164 STATE DEPARTME'IsTT EMPLOYEE LOYALTT ESTVESTIGATION
Haywood, Allan S., administrator, Federal Workers of America, Washington,
D. C.
Hecht, Ben, writer, California.
Hewes, L. I., Jr., Palo Alto, Calif., National Council on Race Relations.
Hillman, Sidney, president, Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America.
Hollander, Si'lney, manufacturer, Maryland.
Hughes, Langston, poet. New York.
Imbrie, James, banker, Trenton, N. J.
Kenyon, Dorothy, judge. New York City.
Kingdon, Dr. Frank, author. New York.
Kirchwey, Freda, publisher, the Nation, New Yorlv.
Krzycki, Leo. president, American Slav Congress, New York.
Kulikowski. Adam, publisher, Opportunity, Virginia.
Lange, Oscar, professor. University of Chicago, 111.
Lapp, John, Independent labor conciliator, Chicago, 111.
LeCron, James, assistant to Henry A. Wallace as Secretary of Agriculture,
Berkeley, Calif.
Lee, Canada, actor, New York City.
Lerner, Max, author, editor, PM, New York.
Lewis, Alfred Baker, Greenwicli, Conn., president. Trade Union Accident and
Health Association.
Lewis, John Frederick, president. Art Alliance, Philadelphia, Pa.
Lewis, William Draper. Philadelphia, Pa.
Lochard, Dr. Metz T., editor, Chicago Defender, Chicago, 111.
Loeb, James, secretary, Union for Democratic Action, New York.
Lxiyten, Dr. W. J., professor of astronomy. University of Minnesota, Minneapolis,
Minn.
Mason. Lucy Randolph, Atlanta, Ga.
Maurer, Dr. Wesley, School of Journalism, LTniversity of Michigan.
McAllister, Mrs. Thomas F., former director, women's division, National Demo-
cratic Party, Grand Rapids, Mich.
McConnell, Francis J., bishop. New York City.
McCulloch, Frank, director, Mullenbach Institute, Chicago, 111.
McDonald, David J., secretary-treasurer, United Steelworkers of America,
Pennsylvania.
!\Ic<Till, James H., McGill Manufacturing Co., Valparaiso, Ind.
Mc^Iahon, Francis, professor, University of Chicago, Chicago, 111.
McWilliams, Cary, attorney. Avriter, Los Angeles, Calif.
Motherwell, Hiram, author. New York.
Murrav, Philip, president, Congress of Industrial Organizations, Washington,
D. C.
Mulzac. Capt. Hugh, United States merchant marine, Jamaica, Long Island.
Neilson, William A., educator, Falls Village. CouJi.
Niebuhr. Dr. Reinhold, professor, Union Theological Seminary, New York.
Norris. Hon. George W., Nebraska.
Osowski, Dr. W. T., president, American Slav Congress, ^Michigan.
Patton, James G., president. National Farmers Union, Colorado.
Perry, Jennings, editor, Nashville Tennessean, Tennessee.
Pinchot. Cornelia Bryce, Washington, D. C.
Pinchot. Gifford. Milford. Pa.
Platek. V. X., president. National Slovak Society. Pennsylvania.
Pope, Dr. Liston, Yale Divinity School, New Haven, Conn.
Pdjiper, Mai-tin, executive secretary. National Lawyers Guild.
Porter, Katherine Anne, writer. New York.
Poynter, Nelson, publisher, St. Petersburg Times, Florida.
Quilici, Judge George L., municipal court, Chicago, 111.
Ratica, Peter, president. United Russian Orthodox Brotherhood of America,
Pennsylvania.
Reid. Dr. Ira., associate director. Southern Regional Council, Atlanta, Ga.
Reynolds, J. Louis, Reynolds Metals Co., Virginia.
Ricker, A. W., editor. Farm Union Herald, St. Paul, Minn.
Rieve, Emil, president. Textile Workers Union of America, New York.
Robeson, Paul, actor. New York.
Robinson, Edward G., Hollywood, Calif.
Robinson, Mrs. Edward G., Hollywood, Calif.
Robinson, Reid, president, United Mine, Mill and Smelter Workers of America,
Colorado.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 165
liosenhluin, Frank. Aiualf,'a mated (lothing Workers of America, New York.
lioseutlial, Morris S., Steiu, Hall »fc Co., Inc., New York.
Koss, Mrs. J. D., Seattle, Wash.
K.vaii. n. Frank, managing editor, Courier-Post, Camden, N. J.
Sackelt, Sheldon F., editor, Coos Bay Times, Marshfield, Oreg.
Schli'singer, Arthur M., professor of history, Harvard University.
Schnman. Frederick L., professor of international relations, Williams College,
Massachusetts.
Schwartz, C. K., attorney, Chicago, 111.
SeitVrheld, David F., president. N. Erlanger Blumgart & Co., New York City.
Suiathers, Hon. William H.. New Jersey.
Smith, Lillian, editor. South Today, and author, "Strange P'ruit", Georgia.
Smith, S. Stephenson, Eugene, Oreg.
Soule, George, associate editor. New Republic, New York City.
Speir, Mercedes Powell, presiilent, Iticlimond Consumers Cooperative, Rich-
mond, Va.
Steele, Julian D., president, Boston Branch, NAACP, Boston, Mass.
Sweezey, Alan, professor of economics, Williams College, Massachusetts.
Stone. Maurice L., business executive, 30 Rockefeller Plaza, New York.
Thomas, R. J., president. United Automobile, Aircraft, Agricultural Implement
Workers of America, Detroit. Mich.
Tilly, Mrs. M. E., jurisdictional secretary of Christian social relations of the
southeastern jurisdiction of the Women's Society for Christian Service, Metho-
dist Church, Georgia.
Tobias, Dr. Channing H., member of Joint Army and Navy Committee on Wel-
fare and Recreation and Mayor's Committee on Unity, New York City.
Townsend, Willard, president, United Transport Service Employees of America,
Chicago, 111.
Van Kleeck. Mary, Russell-Sage Foundation, New York City.
Walsh, J. Raymond, director of research, CIO Political Action Committee, New
York.
Waring, P. Alston, farmer-author, New Hope, Pa.
Weaver. Dr. Robert C, Mayor's Committee on Racial Relations, Chicago, 111.
Welles. Orson, Hollywood, Calif.
Wesley, Carter, publisher, Plouston Informer, Tex.
Wheeluright, Mrs. Ellen DuPont, Wilmington, Del.
Whitney, A. F., president, Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen, Ohio.
Williams, Aubrey, National Farmers Union, Washington, D. C.
AVilson, Mrs. Luke I., Bethesda, Md.
Wise, James Waterman, author, radio commentator, New York.
Wright. Jr., Bishop R. R., executive secretary, Negro Fraternal Council of
Churches in America, Ohio.
Young, P. B., publisher, Norfolk Journal and Guide, Virginia.
Zeman. Jr., Stephen, president, Slovak Evangelical Union, Pennsylvania.
Zmrhal., Prof. Jaroslav J., president, Czechoslovak National Council, Illinois.
Exhibit 46
[From Daily Worker, New York, Wednesda.v, April 16, 1947]
Notables Defend Communist Rights
More than 100 prominent individuals yesterday called upon Congress to defeat
the various "exceptional and punitive measures directed against the Communist
Party," now in the hands of the House Committee on Un-American Activities.
Signers of the letter include Thomas Mann, Franklin P. Adams, Vincent
Sheean, Prof. Frederick L. Schuman of Williams College, Mr. and Mrs. Sher-
wood Eddy, Mrs. Margaret Sanger Slee, Jo Davidson, Garson Kanin, Libby Hol-
man, and Dean Walter G. Mudder of Boston University School of Theology.
■'Legislation such as that proposed by Congressmen Rankin, Sheppard, Hartley,
Parnell Thomas, and McDonough follows the Hitler pattern," the signers declared
in a letter to House Speaker Joseph Martin, released by the Civil Rights Congress.
"The Communist Party is a legal American political party. We see nothing
in its program, record or activities, either in war or peace to justify the enactment
of the repressive legislation now being urged upon the Congress in an atmos-
phere of an organized hysteria."
166 STATE DEPARTMENT EJMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
Among the other signers of the letter are Samuel L. M. Barlow, Sholem Asch,
Elmer A. Benson, former Governor of Minnesota ; Prof. S. P. Breckenridge, Uni-
versity of Chicago : Zlatko Balokovie, Professors Archibald Cox, H-^nry Wads-
worth Longfellow Dana and F. O. Matthiessen of Harvard University; Prof. J.
Frank Dobie, University of Texas, Adolf Dehn.
Also, Mayor Cornelius D. Scully, Pittsburgh, Pa.; Charles Houston, attorney
Roscie Dunjee, Oklahoma City ; Prof. Henry Pratt Fairchild, Howard Fast, Dr.
Harry F. Ward, John Howard Lawson, Agnes Smedley, Rev. Charles F. McClen-
nan, Cleveland, Ohio ; Arthur Miller, Artnr Schnabel, Dashiell Hammett, and Dr.
Charlotte Hawkins Brown, president, Palmer Memorial Institute.
Also, Max Weber, William Jay Schieffelin, Dr. E. Franklin Frazier, Howard
University; Bishop W. Y. i'ell, Cordele, Ga. : INPitthew Josephson. h'storian;
Rabbi Jacob H. Kaplan, Miami, Fla. ; Francis Fisher Kane, Philadelphia attorney ;
Prof. Malcolm Sharp, University of Chicago Law School ; George Marshall and
Milton Kaufman, Civil Rights Congress.
(Titles and institutions for identification only.)
Exhibit 47
National Wallace for President Committee,
39 Park Avenue, Netc York, N. T.
For A. M. Belease, Fridaii, March 26, 19 '/S
Formation of a 700-member National Wallace for President Committee was
announced yesterday (Thursday) by 'Elmer A. Benson, former Minnesota
Governor and chairman of the Wallace group.
The committee will hold its first meeting in Chicago April 9, 10, and 11, to
make plans for the formation of a new national political party and to plan
the program for the Wallace campaign.
Programs for the various divisions of the Wallace committee will be drafted
on the opening day of the meeting. The divisions include those for labor, women,
professional groups, nationality groups, youth, and farm.
On April 10 and through part of Ai>ril 11. State directors from apijroximately
40 States will report on their organizational progress and their drive to jiut
Wallace's name on the ballot. The press will be admitted to this session of the
meeting.
On the night of April 10 the committee members will attend a mass rally at
the Chicago Stadium, where both Mr. Wallace and Senator Glen Taylor will
speak.
The Chicago meeting will also issue the call for the new party convention and
set the date and place.
Eleven new State parties have already been formed by Wallace groups. Plans
are already under way for forming new parties shortly in 24 other States.
Among the 700 members of the committee are :
Zlatko Balokovie, violinist and president of the American Slav Congress, New
York: Charlotta Bass, California publisher: Leonard Bernstein, musician. New
York ; Bart J. Bok, assistant director of Harvard University Observatory, Massa-
chusetts ; Harry Bridges, president. International Longshoremen's and Ware-
housemen's Union, CIO, California ; Charlotte Hawkins Brown, educator. North
Carolina; Scott Buchanan, educator, Massachusetts; Quentin Burdick, education
director of North Dakota Farmers Union ; Dr. Allan N. Butler, Harvard Medical
School, Massachusetts ; Hugh Bi-yson, president, aiarine Cooks and Stewards
Union, CIO ; Mrs. Evans Carlson, Oregon ; John Clark, president. Mine, Mill, and
Smelters Union, CIO, Illinois; Robert Coates, New Yorker Magazine: John Coe,
State senator, Florida ; Fannie Cook, novelist, Missouri ; Dr. Leo Davidoff, neuro-
surgeon, Monteflore Hospital, New Y^ork; Prof. Frank Dobie, University of
Texas ; Olin Downes, music critic, New York ; W. E. B. DuBois, research director
of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, New-
York ; Roscoe Dunjee, publisher, Oklahoma : James Durkin, president, United
Office and Professional Workers of America, CIO, New York ; Mrs. Clifford Durr,
Virginia ; Prof. Thomas Emerson, Yale Law School ; Jose Ferrer, actor, New
York: Prof. Robin Field, Tulane University. Louisiana; Albert J. Fitzgerald,
))resident. United Electrical, Radio, and Machine Workers of America, CIO,
New Y^'ork ; Dr. Clark Foreman, president of the Southern Conference for
Human Welfare, Georgia ; Mrs. Elinor Gimbel, New York ; Josiah Gitt, publisher,
York (Pa.) Gazette and Daily; Ben Gold, president. Fur AVoikers International
Union, CIO, New York ; Uta Ilagen, actress, New York ; Roy Harris, composer,
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 167
Colorado: Lillian Hellinan, playwridit. New York; Donald Henderson, presi-
dent. Food, Tobacco, and Asricnltural Work(M-s of America. ("lO: Ira A. Hirsch-
mann. former inspector jieneral for I'NKKA. New York: Henry T. Hnnt, former
mayor of Cincinnati: N^. Floyd Hunter, director. Community rinnnini;' Council,
Atlanta. Ga. : .Tohu Huston, tilm director, California: Contj.ressman Leo Isacson,
New York: Francis Fisher Kjuie, rhiladelphia : Howard Koch, Hollywood screen
writer: Leo Ki-zycki, retired A'lce president, Amaliiamated Clothinc: Workers of
Ameriia. Wisconsin: Canada Lee, actor. New York; Curtis McDouuall, North-
western I'niversity. Illinois: .lames McfJill, Indiana nianufa<-turer : Howard
McKenzie, vice president. National Maritime Union, CIO; Aline McMahon,^
.•ictress, Los Angeles; Congressman Vito Marcantonio, New York; Prof. F. O.
Matthiesson, Harvard LTniypi-sity, Massachusetts ; Daniel Mebane, publisher.
New Kepuhlic, New York; Frederic G. Melcher, editor of Publishers* Weekly,
New .lersey ; Dmitri ^litropolous. conductor of the Minneapolis Symphony
Orcliestra ; Capt. Hugb IMulzac, captain of the Booker T. W<ishi)if/to)i : Stanley
Nowak, State senator, Michigan ; Grant W. Oakes, president. Farm Equipment
Workers Unuion, CIO, Illinois: Sono Osato, actress, California: Dr. Linus
Paulinir, physicist, California Institute of Technoloiry : Morris Pizer, president.
United Furniture Workers of America, CIO: Abraham Pomerantz, former United
States prosecntin- at the Nuremburu' War Crimes Trials. New York : Lee Press-
man, former CIO general counsel : Michael J. Quill, president. Transport AVorkers
of America. CIO: Magistrate Joseph Rainey. Philadelphia: O. John Rogge,
former Assistant United States Attorney General. New York; Prof. John G.
Rideout. Durham. N. H. ; Prof. Frederick L. Schumann. Williams College. Massa-
chusetts ; Jospeh P. Selly, president. American Communications Association,
CIO; Artie Shaw, bandleader. Norwalk, Conn.; Dr. Michael A. Shadid. Okla-
homa City. Okla. : Dr. Maud Slye, director of the University of Chicago Cancer
Research': Mrs. Edgar Snow (Nym Wales) Madison, Conn.; Robert St. John,
author. New York ; Kenneth Spencer, singer. New York ; Fred Stover, president,
Iowa Farmers Union: iSIark Van Doren, poet. New York; Mary Van Kleeck,
Russell Sage Foundation, New York; F. A. Vider, chairman, Slovene American
National Council, Chicago: Smeale Voydanoff, president. Macedonian American
Peoples League, Michigan : Addie L. Weber, president, New Jersey State Feder-
ation of Teachers. AFL ; Don West. poet. Oglethorpe LTniversity, Atlanta, Ga.;
Nelson V\'illis, president. Cook County Bar Association. Chicago; James Water-
man Wise, New York: Ed Yeomans. director of the Eastern Division. Naticmal
Farmers Union : Chester Young, vice president. National Maiitime Union, CIO.
Assistant M. Benson as cochairman of the committee are Jo Davidson, sculptor ;
Albert J. Fitz*,^erald. president of the CIO United Electrical, Radio, and :Macliine
AVorkers of America ; Mrs. Anita McCormick Blaine, of Chicago ; Paul Robeson,
sinirer, and Dr. Rexford G. Tugwell of the University of Illinois faculty.
Comnuttee treasurer is Angus Cameron, editor in chief of Little, Brown &
Co., publishers. Campaign manager is C. B. Baldwin.
Exhibit 48
The Text of an Open Calling for Greater Unity of the Anti-Fascist Forces
AND Strengthening of the Front Against Aggression Through Closer
Cooperation With the Soviet Union Released on August 14 by 400 Leading
Americans
To All Active Supporters of Democracy and Peace
One of the greatest problems confronting al Ithose engaged in the struggle for
democracy and peace, whether they be liberals, progressives, trade-unionists, or
others, is how to unite their various forces so as to achieve victory for their com-
mon goals. The Fascists and their allies are well aware that democracy will win
if its supporters are united. Accordingly, they are intent on destroying such
unity at all costs.
On the inteinational scene the Fascists and their friends have tried to prevent
a muted antiaggression front by sewing suspicion between the Soviet Union and
other nations interested in maintaining peace.
On the domestic scene the reactionaries are attempting to split the democratic
front by similar tactics. Realizing that here in America they cannot get far with
a definitely pro-Fascist appeal, they strive to pervert American anti-Fascist
sentiment to their own ends. With the aim of turning anti-Fascist feeling against
the Soviet Union they have encouraged the fantastic falsehood that the U. S. S. R.
and the totalitarian states are basically alike. By this strategy they hope to
GS070 — 50 — pt. 1 12
168 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
create dissension among the progressive forces whose united strength is a first
necessity for the defeat of fascism.
Some sincere American liberals have fallen into this trap and unwittingly
aided a cause to which they are essentially opposed. Thus, a number of them
have carelessly lent their signatures to the recent manifesto issued by the so-
called Committee for Cultural Freedom. This manifesto denounces in vague,
undefined terms all forms of "Dictatorship" and asserts that the Fascist states
and Soviet Russia equally menace American institutions and the democratic way
of life. . . ^ , . .
While we prefer to dwell on facts rather than personalities, we feel it is neces-
sary to point out that amouy the signers of this manifesto are individuals who
have for years had as their chief political objective the maligning of the Soviet
people and their government, and it is precisely these people who are the initia-
tors and controllers of the committee.
A number of other committees have been formed which give lip service to
democracy and peace while actually attacking the Soviet Union and aiding re-
action. Honest persons approached by such committees should scrutinize their
aims very carefully and support only those groups genuinely interested in pre-
serving culture and freedom and refusing to serve as instruments for attacking
the Soviet Union or aiding fascism in any other way.
The undersigned do not represent any committee or organization, nor do they
propose to form one. Our object is to point out the real purpose behind all these
attempts to bracket the Soviet Union with the Fascist states, and to make it
clear that Soviet and Fascist policies are diametrically opposed. To this end we
should like to stress ten basic points in which Soviet socialism differs fundamen-
tally from totalitarian fascism.
1. The Soviet Union continues as always to be a consistent bulwark against
war and aggression, and works unceasingly for the goal of a peaceful inter-
national order.
2. It has eliminated racial and national prejudice within its borders, freed the
minority peoples enslaved under the Tzars, stimulated the development of the
culture and economic welfare of these peoples, and made the expression of anti-
semitism or any racial animosity a criminal offense.
3. It has socialized the means of production and distribution through the public
ownership of industry and the collectivization of agriculture.
4. It has established nation-wide socialist planning, resulting in increasingly
higher living standards and the abolition of unemployment and depression.
5. It has built the tiade unions, in which almost 24,000,000 workers are organ-
ized, into the very fabric of its society.
6. The Soviet Union has emancipated woman and the family, and has de-
veloped an advanced system of child care.
7. From the viewpoint of cultural freedom, the difference between the Soviet
Union and the Fascist countries is most striking. The Soviet Union has aff'ected
one of the most far-reaching cultural and educational advances in all history and
among a population which at the start was almost three-fourths illiterate. Those
writers and thinkers whose books have been burned by the Nazis are published in
the Soviet Union. Tlie best literature from Homer to Thomas Mann, the best
thought from Aristotle to Lenin, is available to the masses of the Soviet people,
who themselves actively participate in the creation of culture.
8. It has replaced the myths and superstitions of old Russia with the truths
and techniques of experimental science, extending scientific procedures to every
field, from economics to public health. And it has made science and scientific
study available to the mass of the people.
9. The Soviet Union considers political dictatorship a transitional form and
has shown a steadily expanding democracy in every sphere. Its epoch-making
new constitution guarantees Soviet citizens universal suffrage, civil liberties,
the right to employment, to leisure, to free education, to free medical care, to
material security in sickness and old age, to equality of the sexes in all fields of
activitv, and to equality of all races and nationalities.
10. In n^atiou to Russia's past, the country has been advancing rapidly along
the road of material and cultural progress in ways that the American people can
understand and appreciate.
The Soviet Union has an economic system different from our own. But Soviet
aims and achievements make it clear that there exists a sound and permanent
basis in mutual ideals for cooperation between the U. S. A. and the U. S. S. R. on
behalf of world peace and the security and freedom of all nations.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
169
Accordingly, tlie signers of rliis letter ur.ce Americans of whatever political
persnasion to stand iirmly for close cooperation in tlii.s sphere between the United
States and Soviet Russia, and to he on yuard against any and all attempts to
prevent such cooperation in this critical period in the affairs of mankind.
Among the 400 signers of the open letter
Dr. Thomas Addes, professor of medi-
cine, Leland Stanford University
Helen Alfred, executive director Na-
tional Public Ilousiug Conference
Prof. Newton Arvin. professor of Kng-
lish, Smith College
Dr. Charles S. Bacon, honorary piesi-
denr, American Russian Institute.
Chicago. 111.
Frank C. Bancroft, editor, Social Work
Today
Maurice Becker, artist
Louis P. Birk, editor, Modern Age
Books, Inc.
T. A. Bisson, research associate, For-
eign Policy Association
Alice Stone Blackwell, suffragist, writer
Marc B itzstein, composer
Anita Biock, Theater (Juiid playreader
Stirling B >wen, i>oet
Richard Boyer, staff writer. The New
Yorker
Millen Brand, writer
Simon Breines, architect
Robert Brirfault, v.riter
Prof. Dorothy Brewster, assistant pro-
fessor of English, Columbia Univer-
sity
Prof. Edwin Berry Burgum. associate
professor of English, New York Uni-
versity
Fielding Burke, writer
Katherine Devereaux Blake, teacher
Meta Berger. writer, widow of the first
Socialist Congressman
Prof. Robert A. Brady, professor of eco-
nomics. University of California
J. E. Bromberg, actor
Bessie Beatty, writer
Vera Caspary, scenaiio writer
Maria Cristina Chambers, of the Au-
thors' League
Prof. Robert Chaml)ers, research pro-
fessor of biology. New York Uni-
versity
Harold Clurman. producer
Robert ^I. Coates. writer
Lester Cohen, writer
Kyle Crichton, editorial staff of Collier's
Weekly
Miriam Allen De Ford, writer
Paul de Kruif, writer
Pietro di Donato, writer
William Dodd. .Jr.. chairman Anti-Nazi
Literature Committee
Stanley D. Dodge, University of INIich-
igan
Prof. Dorothy Douglas, department of
economics. Smith College
are :
Muriel Draper, writer
Prof. L. C. Dunn, professor of zoology,
Columbia University
Prof, llaakou Chevalier, professor of
French, University of Califoriua
Prof. George B. Cressey, chairman of
the department of geology and geog-
raphy, Syracttse I'niversity
Ilariet G. Eddy, library specialist
Prof. Henry Pratt Fairchild, professor
of sociology. New York University
Kenneth Fearing, poet
I'rof. Mildred Fairchild, professor of
economics, Bryn :Mawr College
Alice Withrow Field, writer
Sara Bard Field, writer
William O. Field, Jr., chairman of the
board, American Russian Institute
Irving Fineman, writer
Marjorie Fischer, writer
Angel Flores, writer, critic
Waldo Frank, writer
Wanda Gao, artist
Hugo Gellert. artist
Robert Ge.ssuer, department of English,
New York University
Prof. Willystiue Goodsell, associate pro-
fessor of education (retired), Colum-
bia University
Mortimer Graves, of the American
Council of Learned Societies
Dr. John H. Gray, economist, former
president of the American Economics
xVssociation
V\'illiam Gropper, artist
IMaurice Halperin, associate editor,
Books Abroad
Earl P. Hanson, explorer, writer
Prof. Samuel N. Harper, professor of
Russian language and institutions,
Chicago Universit.v.
Rev. Thomas L. Harris, national execu-
tive secretary, American League for
Peace and Democracy
Dashiell Hammett, writer
Ernest Hemingwa.v
Granville Hicks, writer
Prof. Norman E. Himes, department of
sociology, Colgate University
Charles J. Hendley, President Teachers'
Union of the City of New York
Leo Huberman, writer
Langston Hughes, jwet
Agatha Hies, writer
Rev. Otis G. Jackson, rector of St. Paul's
E])iscopal Church, Flint, Mich.
Sam JafFe, actor
Orrick Johns, poet
^latthew Joseph.sou, writer
170 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
George Kauffinan, playwright
Prof. Alexander Kann, associate pro-
fessor of Slavic languages, University
of California
Fred C. Kelly, writer
Rockwell Kent, artist
Dr. Jolin A. Kingsbury, social worker,
administrative consultant, WPA
Beatrice Kinkead, writer
Lincoln E. Kirstein, ballet producer
Arthur Kober. playwright
Alfred Kreyniborg, poet
Edward Laml>, lawyer
Dr. Corliss Lamont, writer, lecturer
Margaret I. Lamont, sociologist, writer
.7. J. Lankes, artist
Jay Leyda, cinema critic
John Howard Lawson, playwright
Kmil Lengyel, writer, critic
Prof. Max Lerner, professor of govern-
ment. Williams College
Meridel LeSueur, writer
Meyer Levin, writer
Prof. Charles W. Lightbody, department
of government and history, St. Law-
rsHice University
Robert Morss Lovett, Governor of the
Virgin Islands, and editor of The
New Republic
Prof. Halford E. Luccock, Yale Univer-
sity Divinity School
Katherine DuPre Lumpkin, writer
Klaus Mann, lecturer, writer, son of
Thomas Mann
Prof. F. O. Mathiessem, associate pro-
fes.sor of bistory of literature. Har-
vard University
Dr. Anita Marburg, department of
P^nglish. Sai'ah L:!wrence College
Dr. George Marshall, ec(momist
Aline MnclNIalion, actress
Clifford T. McAvoy, instructor, depart-
ment of romance languages. College of
the City of New York
Prof. V. J. McGill, professor of philoso-
phy. Hunter College
Prof. Robert McGregor, Reed College
Rutb McKenney, writer
Darwin J. Mesrole, lawyer
Prof. Herbert A. Miller, professor of
economics, Bryn Mawr College
Harvey O'Connor, writer
Clifford Odets, playwright
Senator McCarthy. I would like to call one to the committee's at-
tention, somethino- I did not suspect before I saw this document.
It seems that on September 12. 1949, one of these Communist-front
organizations sponsored a dinner for Henry A. Wallace and, believe
it or not, the convert charge was $10.
Now, Mr. Chairman, I understand that you have hired a staff to
obtain the complete information on anyone in the State Department
or closely related agencies who is suspected of being a bad security
risk.
Shaemus O'Sheel writer, critic
Mary White Ovington, social worker
S. J. Perelmau, writer
Dr. Jolni P. I'etei-s, department of in-
ternal medicine, Yale University
Medical School
Dr. Emily M. Pierson, physician
Walter N. Polakov, engineer
Prof. Alan Porter, professor of German,
Vassar College
George D. Pratt, Jr., agriculturist
John Hyde Preston, writer
Samuel Putnam, writer
Prof. Paul Radin, professor of anthro-
pology. University of California
Prof. Walter Rautenstrauch, professor
of industrial engineering, Columbus
University
P.ernard J. Reis, accountant
Bertha C. Reynolds, social worker
Lynn Riggs, playwright
Col. Raymond Robins, former head of
American Red Cross in Russia
William Rollins, Jr., writer
Harold J. Rome, composer
Ralph Roeder, writer
Dr. Joseph A. Rosen, former head, Jew-
ish Joint Distribution Board
Eugene Schoen, architect
Prof. Margaret Shlauch, associate
p/ofessor of English, New York Uni-
versity
Prof. Frederick L. Scliuman, professor
of government, Williams College
Prof. Vida D. Scudder. professor emer-
itiis of English, Wellesley College
George Seldes, writer
Vincent Sheean, writer
Viola Brothers Shore, scenario writer
Herman Shuudin, producer
Prof. Ernest J. Sinnuons, assistant pro-
fessor of English literature, Harvard
T jiiversity
Irina Skariatina, writer
Dr. F. Tredwell Smith, educator
Dr. Steplienson Smitii, president, Ore-
gon Conunonwealth Federation
Hester Sondergaard, actress
Isobel Walker Soule, writer, editor
Lionel Stander, actor
Cliristina Stead, writer
A. F. Steig, artist
Alfred K. Stern, housing specialist
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 171
1 am, therefore, subiiiittin<i; to the cliairinan for the attention of
the staff a list of 25 names which requires further investigation. All
of these individuals to the best of my knowledoe are either in the State
De]>artment, or in closely related a<»encies. At least they were very
recently.
Senator Tydings. We will look them up.
Senator Mc^Caktiiy. I understand all of them have been investi-
•rated by the Federal Bureau of 1 n vest i^fi^t ion and that such FBI in-
vest i<>at ions have developed information which is now in the files —
information which, accordino- to Acheson's own "yardstick of loyalty"
would stamp many, if not all of them, as beinj^ bad security risks.
'\^'ith the very limited staff which I have available (and, as the
Chair knows, 1 have been alloc;:ted no funds for this investi<2:ation ;
I have been conducting it completely on my own), it would take me
a considerable period of time to develop all of the information on
all of these individuals and submit individual cases on each of them
to the connnittee.
I intend, of course, to continue my investigation and assemble all
available information which comes to my attention on any of these
individuals, which information shall be available to the staff of this
connnittee.
In the meantime, in order to get things started, I believe the staff
might well start checking on these individuals. Obviously, the staff
could do a much speedier job in that the files, which are not easily
available to me, will be available to the committee.
Xone of the names which I now hand the Chair covers the cases
which I covered on the Senate floor.
Let me make that clear. These are additional names, some I had
not had time to develop when I made the speech on the Senate floor.
vSenator Tytoxgs. AYe are glad to have them. We will look into
them, examine the files, and make a report.
Senator McCarthy. I thank the chairman.
I shall continue to develop as much information on those cases as
possilde and will, of course, submit to the connnittee all such informa-
tion as soon as I have it properly documented.
I have remaining a considerable amount of information on the bal-
ance of these cases covered on the Senate floor, which information is
being assembled as rapidly as possible and put into shape to be pre-
sented to the committee. This task will be completed as soon as
possible.
I now give the Chair, if I may, these names.
Senator Tydixgs. Those are the keys?
Senator McCarthy. Those are the 25 names that have bad informa-
tion in their files, information which indicates they should not be
there.
Senator Tydixgs. I am very ho])eful that we can get our staff under
way some time during the week, and I would like to consult the Sena-
tor as to his convenience when he will give us in executive session,
as he said he would, the names of the 81 people, some of whom he
has since given us in public, but all of the 81 cases that he delineated
on the Senate floor, so that we may key the names to the information
which the Senator has given ns, and when we request the files, make
sure that we are requesting them for all the people that he has men-
tioned in his testimony.
172 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
I would like to say to tlie Senator that it would be very helpful to
the committee if we could get all of the names at one time, for this
reason : I would like to make the request in writing, confidentially of
course, to the proper authorities for all of these files at one time, and
provide a safe place, arranged as they come from different depart-
ments, where they can all be assembled in one room, so that if the
Civil Service files or State Department or any other files are needed,
we will have them all in one place, where we can make a thorough
and complete investigation of a case without having to go from one
de])artment to another, and I am sure the Senator will want it done
that way.
Senator McCarthy. I think it is an excellent idea.
Senator Tydings. But unless we have all of the files in one room at
the start, it will take us much longer than we need to do it. So I will
ask the Senator, as I said, at his convenience, in executive session,
today if he would like to, or tomorrow, if he will not give us the
keys'so that we can turn them over to counsel and our staff and begin
the operation of assembling these files.
Senator McCarthy. Let me say to the Chair that as soon as I have
all the information assembled which I have— I think I have con-
siderable information of benefit to your staff.
Senator Tydings. We would like to have it.
Senator McCarthy. It will all l)e turned over with the names. I
have given you the names of 25 that I consider very important, 25 that
I have not been able to develop beyond the point of knowing that the
files are valuable. The files show that the FBI has given information
which, so far as I know, makes them bad security risks under Ache-
son's own yardstirlv. The staff will have plenty to do on those 25
and will have no difficulty at all, I am sure, in transmitting to the
staff information which I have. I am sure we will get along on that
very well.
I might say that before I turn over the Senate floor cases 1 want
to check all of the information, document it, and give it to you. There
seems to be a great deal of interest, and rightly so, on the part of
people as to just the extent of the information we have on those par-
ticular cases.
Senator Tydings. I would say to the Senator that during the course
of this proceeding if he will come to me with any additional matter
that he has not given to us at the start, we will be glad to have it.
In order that there may be no misunderstanding about it, I would
appreciate it if the Senator would hand it personally to me until
such time as I can designate somebody else to hand it to in the event
that I am not available at the moment.
As I understand it, the Senator has now placed his case before us.
and he wants us to go ahead and investigate these loyalty files and
Senator McCarthy. You understand that I have a sizable number
of additional cases to lav before the Senator, work that will take, I
assume, 2 or 3 or 4 days. ^ Whether the Chair will want it in executive
session or in public I frankly do not care.
Senator Tydings. How does the Senator want to do it ?
Senator McCarthy. I think, Mr. Chairman, when we refer to men
like John Service, Owen Lattimore, individuals of top importance,
I believe any facts which we have with regard to them definitely
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION ] 73
should 1)0 made public. 1 think those morals cases, which also are
extremely bad security risks, obviously should be made in executive
session. Then there is an area in between which I frankly don't care
Avhotlier they are made in public or executive session.
1 miirht say this, outside of the top men, like Hanson, who is taking
over this point 4 program, Lattimore. and several other names that
I think should be given in ])ublic. I think the names better be given
in executive session, now that you have a staff to check on them. That
is merely my suggestion.
I might say to the Chair I would like to see the Chair follow through
his suugestion this afternoon. I can give him information which
1 think^
Senator Tydings. I am going to ask the Senator if he won't hold
that information until tomorrow, because I have no place to keep it.
1 prefer to have the Senator keep it until tomorrow, until I can make
some definite arrangements for quarters and one or two other things,
protecting the information we get and so on.
What I would like to know is, does the Senator want us to go ahead
now. or does he want us to sit to hear more things ?
Senator McCarthy. I will have considerable more, Mr. Chairman,
but I would like some time to develop the cases so I can present them
in chronological order, with all the information I have. That wall take
me time.
Senator Tydings. I am not questioning it. I am just trying to find
out to acconnnodate the Senator. When does he think he will want
to have this stuff available, and how does he want to deliver it to us?
Does he want to do it in a session such as we are in now, or does he
want to hand it to the committee for investigation? There are five
of us on the committee. Whatever way the Senator wants to do it,
we will try to accommodate him. We will leave that up to his judg-
ment.
Senator McCarthy. I thank the Chair, and as I get the other cases
in shape I will contact the Chair, and I am sure we can work out some-
thing completely satisfactory to both the committee and myself as to
how the further facts will be presented.
Senator Tydtxgs. In order to make the record straight, I put in
the record the first day, cut out, the case numbers from 1 to 81, 1 think
it was, and put those in the record so that vce would have that already
as a part of the testimony, and I take it for granted the Senator wants
that made a part of his sworn testimony.
Senator McCarthy. I do no not mind having it made part of the
recf)rd. If the chairman wants me to repeat any of it under oath, I
will be glad to do so.
Senator Tydings. I do not want you to repeat it. I want to know
what category it is in. I want to know whether you desire it to be
part of your sworn testimony. We can put it in as a part of the Con-
gressional Record, or we can put it in as part of his sworn testimony.
Which would he prefer?
Senator McCarthy. I do not follow the chairman. The chairman
has ])ut the evidence in the record. That is the committee's testimony.
If I see fit to put any testimony in, I will put it in. Do you follow
me?
174 STATE DEPARTMENT EAIPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
Senator Tydings. AVliat I meant was, the Senator gave us 81 cases
on the floor of the Senate. I am not trying to take any advantage of
the Senator.
Senator McCarthy. The Senator would have difficulty doing that.
Senator Ttdings. I believe I would, and I would not do it if 1
could. I would like the Senator to believe that. I want him to have
a fair chance here in every sense of the word.
Senator McCarthy. I am sure the Chair does.
Senator Tydings. He delineated 81 cases on the floor of the Sen-
ate, which I have put in the record. I see no reason \A'hy they should
not be a part of the Senator's sworn testimou}', that he is bringing
those cases before the committee.
Senator McCarthy. The only way you can make those part of the
sworn testimony, Mr. Chairman, is to ask me to repeat them. You can-
not make an oath retroactive. I do not follow the Chair at all, and
I assume the Chair is not a lawyer. There is no way of making an
oath retroactive. If the Chair wants me to repeat what I said on the
Senate floor, under oath, I will be glad to come in and do that. There
is no possible way the Chair can put things in the record and say
"Now will you consider that as part of your testimony under oath?"
Let's make this clear. If the Chair wants me to come back here
at any time and repeat any part or all of what I said on the Senate
floor, and do it under oath, I will be glad to do it. I am not going
to try to indulge in some completely impossible and ridiculous proce-
dure of trying to make an oath retroactive.
Senator Tydixgs. I have no disposition to make it retroactive.
What I thouglit was, the Senator has testified under oath. He has
also delineated certain cases on the Senate floor. I simply wanted
to ask him if the remarks he made on the Senate floor, and which are
now a part of tlie record, he wishes included in his sworn testimony,
or wlietlier he wishes them not included in the sworn testimony. That
is all I asked the Senator.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman, regardless of what my wishes
are, the only way I can make them part of the sworn testimony is to
swear to them, either in affidavit form or repeat them. If the Chair
desii-es them put in affidavit form, if he wants me to repeat them, I
will be glad to take that up with him. Otlierwise, the Chair has
introduced them.
Senator Tydings. All right, if the Senator does not want to make
them part of his sworn testimony.
Senator McCarthy. I will make it part of my sworn testimony
if the Chair wants me to come in and repeat it. There is no way
of making an oath retroactive.
Senator Tydings. Certainly there is. All he needs to say is "All
the things I gave in these cases on the Senate floor I would like
considered a part of my sworn testimony." It is just as simple as
that. There is no trick about that.
Senator McCarthy. I am telling the Chair it can't be done, but
if he wants me to come in and read that part of the Congressional
Record under oath, I will be glad to do that at any time, this after-
noon.
Senator TvmNGS. I was asked by some committee members to ask
that c}uestion of the Senator, and I have discharged my obligation
to them.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY IXVEiSTIGATION 175
Wlioiiever tlie Senator wants to return to the stand, all he has to do
is to tell the chairman.
Senator McCarthy. I thank the chairman very much.
Senator Tydixgs. I would like to ask if Jud<ie Dorothy Kenyon is
in the room ^ I don't know her. She may have some friends in the
room. AVe are counting on hearing her at 2 : 30 this afternoon unless
when I get to my office I find she has requested a postponement to
another day. So far I have received no such message, so unless that
is received, we will proceed, as scheduled yesterday, at 2: 30, to hear
Judge Kenyon.
(Whereupon, at 12: 20 p. m., a recess was taken until 2:30 p. m. of
the same day.)
AFTERNOON SESSION
Senator Tydings. The committee will come to order.
For the record, the day that Senator ^IcCarthy testified, bringing
in the name of Miss, or Judge Dorothy Kenyon, I received a telegram,
either that daj' or the following morning, I think that night, in which
^liss Kenyon asked me to accord her the privilege of a hearing.
I inmiediately replied and told her that I would be glad to set Tues-
day, today, as the time when she might come before this committee
and answer any remarks or charges which Senator ISIcCarthy had
made, and asked her was that satisfactory.
I immediately received another telegram from Judge Kenyon in
which she said Tuesday would be satisfactory, and she is here in re-
sponse to those telegi'ams.
So that Judge Kenyon may know what the powers of this com-
mittee are, and what its duty is, and I think we owe it to her, she
may not have seen the formal resolution which brought us into being,
I would like to read it before she testifies.
This is Senate Resolution 231. It was agreed to on February 22,
1950. The resolution reads as follows :
That the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, or any duly authorized
subcommittee thereof, is authorized and directed to conduct a full and complete
study and investigation as to whether persons who are disloyal to the United
States are or have been employed by the Department of State. The committee
shall report to the Senate at the earliest practicable date the results of its
investigation, .together with such reconnuendations as it may deem desirable,
and if said recommendations are to include formal chai-ges of disloyalty against
any individual, then the committee, before making said recommendations, shall
give said individual open hearings for the purpose of taking evidence or testi-
mony on said charges. In the conduct of this study and investigation, the com-
mittee is directed to procure, by sul»pena, and examine tlie complete loyalty
and employment files and records of all the Government employees in the
Department of State and such other agencies against whom charges have been
heard.
Senator McCarthy, on the first day he appeared before our com-
mittee in open hearing, made certain statements. Judge Kenyon, in
which your name was drawn.
You are now at liberty to proceed to answer them in such manner
as you deem fit.
Before you testify, will you stand and raise your right hand.
Do you solemnly promise that the testimony you shall give m this
matter pending before the committee, in accordance with Senate
Resolution 231, shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but
the truth, so help you God ?
176 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
Miss Kenton. I do.
Senator Tydings. Take a seat, Judge. You may proceed.
TESTIMONY OF MISS DOROTHY KENYON, ACCOMPANIED BY
THEODORE KIENDL, COUNSEL
]\tiss Ken YON. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for giving
me this opportunity to appear.
My name is Dorothy Kenyon. I live at No. 433 West Twenty-first
Street, New York City. I am a practicing lawyer with offices located
at No. 50 Broadway, New York City.
When I was informed of the accusations that were made against
me before this subconnnittee last week, I did explode. Doubtless my
indignation led me to make some impulsive remarks in unparliamen-
tary language. Reflection, and a recollection refreshed by such in-
vestigation as I could make in the interim, now permits a more dis-
passionate approach. However, nothing can diminish the deep
resentment I feel that such outrageous charges should be publicized
before this subcommittee and broadcast over the entire Nation without
any notice or warning to me.
My answer to these charges is short, simple, and direct. I am not,
and never have been disloyal. I am not and never have been, a
Communist. I am not, and never have been a fellow traveler. I am
not, and never have been, a supporter of, a member of, or a sympathizer
with any organization known to me to be, or suspected by me of benig,
controlled or dominated by Communists. As emphatically and un-
reservedly as possible, I deny any connection of any kind or character
with connnunism or its adherents. If this leaves anything iinsaid to
indicate my total and complete detestation of that political philosophy,
it is only because it is impossible for me to express my sentiments.
T mean my denial to be all-inclusive.
So absolute a negation of the charges should be supplemented with
an equally positive, but brief, affirmation of what I am and have
been.
I received my A. B. degree from Smith College and my law degree-
doctor juris — from New York University Law School. I am a member
of Phi "Beta Kap])a and have been for several years a senator of the
United Chapters of Phi Beta Kappa.
I come of a f amilv of lawyers, my father having been a patent laywer
in New York City where my brothers and a cousin now practice under
the firm name of Kenyon & Kenyon. My father's cousin, William S.
Kenyon, was for many years a member of the United States Senate
and later a Federal judge in Iowa.
I was admitted to the bar in 1917 and have practiced law continually
ever since, except during certain periods when I held public office.
Mine is a general practice. I am a member of the Bar Association of
the City of New York, the New York County Lawyers' Association,
the New York State Bar Association, the American Bar Association,
the National Women Lawyers' .Association, the American Society of
International Law, the American Branch of the International Law
Association and several others.
I have held public office three times, first from June 1, 1936, to De-
cember 31, 1937, 2 years, as deputy commissioner of licenses by ap-
pointment of Mayor Fiorello LaGuardia : second from January 1,
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 1 77
1939, to December 31, 1939, 1 year, as municipal court judge in New
York City, also by appointment of JNIayor LaGuardia; and third,
from January 1, 1947. to December 31, 1949, as United States delegate
to the Connnission on the Status of Women of the United Nations,
by appointment of President Truman, ratified and confirmed by the
Senate. I was also appointed in January 1938 by the League of
Nations as one of a Connnission of seven jurists — of whom I was the
only American — to study the legal status of women throughout the
world. This Connnission continued to operate until the war made
further communication between its members impossible. I have also
served on a number of governmentally appointed commissions and
connnittees dealing with such varied subjects as the regulation of
employment agencies, minimum-wage legislation, consumer-cooper-
ative corporations, problems growing out of the wartime employment
of women, et cetera. I have also done a small amount of labor arbi-
tration.
My interest in good government led me early into the ranks of the
League of Women Voters, of which I have been a member for almost
30 years and which I have served in many capacities and offices. It
also led me into the Citizens Union of New York, of whose executive
committee I have been a member for almost 20 years. When the
American Labor Party was formed in New York I was one of its
earliest members, but I left it after our efforts to save it from Com-
munist domination finally failed.
I have here, Mr. Chairman, an exhibit, copies of which I am giving
to all the members of the subconnnittee ; it is dated, the Daily News,
Wednesday, February 14, 1940. It is announcing the setting up of a
committee to fight the Communist attempt to capture the Labor Party,
and I was one of the vice presidents of that organization.
Senator Tydixgs. Would you pause until we can look at the exhibit?
Miss Kenyox. Yes.
Senator Tydixgs. Do you want to read it in, yourself?
Miss Kexyon. No, no, I have read everything, Mr. Chairman, that
is of importance; and I am leaving the whole statement with the ex-
hibits attached. I have a number of other exhibits.
Senator Tydixgs. Just a moment.
Miss Kexyox. Yes.
Senator Tydixgs. Miss Kenyon, would you be kind enough to
identify for us, this document again, and to tell us in a brief way, for
the information of the press, who may not have copies of it, and who
want to know — briefly what is it all about ?
Miss Kexyox. Yes. It is a statement that appeared in the Daily
News, a New York newspaper, on Wednesday, February 14, 1940,
announcing the setting up of a liberal and labor committee to safe-
guard the American Labor Party and to fight the Communists' attempt
to capture that labor party, and my name is there listed as one of the
vice chairmen.
I am simply offering that as documentary evidence.
Senator Tydixgs. I think that identification is sufficient. It will be
accepted as exhibit 49.
I will say to the press : I will leave a copy here on the table, as we
have some extra ones, and should you gentlemen wish to familiarize
yourselves with this to a greater extent, go ahead.
All right, Judge Kenyon, proceed.
178 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
Miss Kenyon. I am now an enrolled Democrat. I am also a member
of Americans for Democratic Action.
My interest in civil liberties led me equally early into the ranks
of the American Civil Liberties Union, of which I have been a member
of the board for almost 20 years. In that connection I have fought
on many civil liberties issues and have participated in many briefs
amicus in defense of the bill of rights.
My interest in education, in labor problems, and in the problems
of women made me an early membei' of the American Association of
University Women, of which I am now second vice president. I am
also a member of the national board of the Young Women's Catholic
Association, a director of the Women's City Club of New York, the
Association for the Aid of Crippled Children, and the Committee of
Women in World Affairs. I was also for many years on the board
of the Consumers' League of New York and was for a time its presi-
dent. I am also a member of numerous other women's organizations.
I am, and always have been, an independent, liberal Rooseveltian
Democrat, devoted to and actively working for such causes as the
improvement of the living and working conditions of labor and the
preservation of civil liberties. To the latter cause especially I have
given much time and attention and have made speeches on that subject
for many years in various parts of the country. At times I have
espoused unpopular causes in that connection and have probably made
some enemies of those who disagreed with my views.
I am, and always have been, an ardent, outspoken American citizen,
yielding to no one in my admiration of the great privileges this coun-
try offers to all its sons and daughters, and determined to do all I
can to maintain those privileges inviolate forever. I am, and always
have been, unalterably opposed to anyone who advocates the overthrow
of onr Government by force or violence, or who otherwise engages
in subversive activities or entertains subversive ideas.
I am not content to rely on these general denials and observations,
however, and I therefore proceed to deal more specifically with the
charges against me. In substance, as I understand it, it is claimed
that it can be established by documentary proof that I have been at
some time a member of 28 or more Communist-front organizations
and therefore stand convicted under the doctrine of guilt by asso-
ciation.
Thus far I have not been confronted with this documentary proof
and as I am totally unaware of the contents of most of the documents,
I am in no position to make an}^ categorical denials or assertions
regarding such statements as they may contain. Here and now, how-
ever, I can and do state, with the absolute confidence borne of my
personal and positive knowledge, that there does not exist and never
has existed any genuine document that proves, or even tends to prove,
that I have ever knowingly joined or sponsored or participated in
the activities of au}^ organization known to me to be even slightly
subversive.
Frankness and caution ndmonish ?ne to nvoid ''T'eatino; fa^se impres-
sions or otherwise putting myself in the i)Osition of the lady who
protested too much. I cannot and do not deny that my name may
have been used, even at times with my consent, in connection with
organizations that later proved to be subversive but which, at the
time, seemed to be engaged in activities or dedicated to objectives
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 179
M-hich I could ami did approve. Nevertheless 1 challenge and defy
anyone to ])rove that I ever joined, or sponsoi-ed, or continued to
identify myself with any organizations or individuals 1 knew, or
had reason to believe, were subversive.
I do not even know the names of all the 28 or more Communist-
front organizations I am sup})osed to have joined. I have taken the
list of organizations from the ])ublished reports in the press. The
names may not be quite accurate, and the list is apparently incom-
plete, or else my arithmetic is w^rong. It is impossible for me to
identify some of the names and events described in those charges.
I have done the best I could, however, in the brief time since hearing
of them and have searched my files, and my own menior}^ in respect
to each one. If any further organizations are alluded to today I shall
ask the committee's indulgence for time to investigate and make my
replies thereon at a later date.
Senator Ttdings. That will be granted.
Miss Kexyox. Thank you very much.
First, let me deny acquaintance with practically every one of the
l^ersons mentioned in the charges as being "familiar company"' to me,
"collaborator," or "fellow red.'' I do not know and have never to
my knowledge laid eyes on Bernard J. Stern, Albert Maltz, Anna
Louise Strong. William Gropper, Langston Hughes, Hewlett John-
son, Ben Gold, Lee Pressmen, Whittaker Chambers, Howard Fast,
Saul Mills, Ella Winter, John Howard Lawson, Henry H. Collins,
Rockwell Kent, Lewis Merrill, Mervyn Rathborne, Dirk J. Struick,
Harry Bridges, Paul P. Crosbie, Benjamin J. Davis, Charles Krum-
bein, Morris Y. Schappes, Simon W. Gerson, Loids Weinstock, Irving
Potash, Helen Selden, or Josephine Herbst.
I once heard Paul Robeson sing at a concert. Harry F. Ward was,
in the thirties — before its Communist purge — chairman of the board
of the American Civil Liberties Union and I of course knew him
there. Corliss Lamont is still on its board. I met Carol King years
ago, before she went "left,'' but I have seen hardly anything of her
in many years. Arthur Kallet's name I vaguely remember, as I
vaguely remember Consumer's Union, but he and it date back in my
memory at least 15 years and, if he were a Communist then, I did not
know it.
I may be -pardoned for putting the other names mentioned in a
different category. They are Mrs. Dean Acheson, Stanley Isaacs,
Philij) Jessup, and Franklin Delano Roosevelt. I am proud to say
I have had a slight acquaintance with them all.
To re})eat, the rest are unknown to me, except as above mentioned,
and the innuendoes as to my relationship with them absolutely false.
Now for the organizations themselves.
I begin with the League of Women Shoppers because my connec-
tion with that organization, which was set up to investigate labor dis-
putes, is ancient history and it was also very short lived. Evelyn
Preston Baldwin, wife of Roger Baldwin, and a close friend of mine,
became its ])resident at its founding in lOo.") or thereabouts. I was a
sponsor. We both withdreAv a year or bO later. I remember that 1 did
so because I did not approve the way the investigations ^vere being
handled. If it was Communist then, neither of us knew about it.
The Political Prisoners' Bail Fund Committee is also ancient his-
tory.
180 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
I have no documentation on this organization in my files but I re-
member that I served as sponsor for a short time at the request ot
Koo-er Baldwin. Mr. Baldwin, who was a trustee ot the tund, tells
me^'that he and others set it up about 1925, to write bail ma great
variety of worthy cases, some may possibly have involved Commu-
nists but most of' them definitely did not. It was liquidated, he tells
me, about 1934. He regarded it as wholly nonpartisan and non-Com-
munist. It is significant that it is apparently not on any subversive
list It is described in the charges merely as subsidiary to the inter-
national Labor Defense, which is on the subversive list. The connec-
tion between them is not stated.
The Consumer's Union is also ancient history. I have never repre-
sented Consumer's Union. I had acted as attorney for Consumer s
Research in its incorporation and for several years thereafter, prior
to 1935, but I never acted for Consumer's Union. Consumer s Union
came into existence, as I recall it, following a strike and split-up of
the business into two organizations. They both test merchandise and
give advice as to good buys. This is where I had my short acquaint-
ance with Arthur Kallet. He was with Consumer's Research and,
later, with Consimier's Union. t c ^
The Conference on Pan-American Democracy comes next, i Una a
letterhead in my file listing me as a sponsor of this organization, dated
March 4, 1939, along with now Senator Paul A. Douglas, John Haynes
Holmes, Quincy Howe, Stanley Isaacs, and Dr. Ralph W. Sockman,
all friends of mine. I remember almost nothing about this organiza-
tion except that I think I may have spoken before it in 1938 or there-
abouts I have never heard of it since. I certainly had no idea at that
time that it was Communist, and I am sure my other sponsor friends
had no such idea either. . o-.t^-ji- t
Now for the National Council of American-Soviet Friendship, i
was never a member of this organization, but I became a sponsor ot
it_alon(r with many distinguished people— at the height of the war
effort— in 1943, 1 think it was— when the Russians were making their
stand before Stalingrad and many of us believed that friendship with
the people of Russia was both possible and good. I withdrew my
sponsorship some 3 years later, when I had become convinced that the
ortranization was no longer being used for the purposes stated m its
title Not long ago a friend told me that my name had not been re-
moved from the sponsor's list as I had requested, and I wrote demand-
ing its removal. I quote that letter :
Gentlemen : I am advised that you are still carrying my name on your letter-
head as a sponsor of your organization. . f
I became a sponsor in 194:? or 1!>44 when the Germans were at the gates ot
Stalingrad and the United States was de-.-p in admiration of the great courage
of the Russian people. Anything which looked toward genuine friendship
between the peop'es of our two countries was highly desirable. Since then,
aiowever vour policv, as I have had occasion to observe it in the press, has
had less and less to do wirh developmeut of genuine friendship between the peoples
of our two countries and more and more to do with mere apologetics for the
Russian Government, which you have supported no less consistently than you
have attacked the United States. This is no way to build friendship and it
makes a mockerv of vour name and alleged purposes. My sponsorship ot the
council as a genuine organ of friend^^hip between the peoples has therefore long
since lapsed. „ , .,. * „c^,.c
I have previously requested you to remove my name from your list ot sponsois
and I must now insist that you do so.
Sincerely yours.
STATE DEPARTIMEXT EiMPLOYEE LOYALTY IXVEvSTIGATION 181
Senator IIickknloopkr. Mr. Chairiiian, J wonder what the date
of tliis let(er is.
Miss Kkxyox. I have it here.
Senator Tydixos. ,Iune IT), ll)4i).
Miss Kenyox. I assnnie tliat my name has been removed by now,
althonji-h I have no way of bein<>- sure. I have no a[)ohjoie.s wliatever
for s})ons(>rin<i" tliis orii-ani/.ation at tlie time I did and under those
circumstances.
As indicative of the standin<r: it liad, it is sig-niticant that President
Rooseveh himself sent a message of greeting to the council at its
meeting on November IG, 11)44, reading as follows :
1 am grateful to you and all those who are celebrating American-Soviet
I'riendship Day for the words of support and confidence I have received. There
is no heiter tribute we can hold out to our Allies than to continue working in
ever-growing accord to establish a peace that will endure. The Dumbarton
Oaks Conference wjiis a step in this direction. Other steps will be taken. In
line with this objective such meetings as you are holding in Madison Square
(rarden and in i^ither great centers throughout the United States are of tremen-
dous as.sistance and value.
It is also significant that President Truman followed it np by another
greeting on November 14, 1045, reading as follows :
The President has asked me to extend to you every good wish for tlie success
of the meeting and to assure you of his interest in all efforts to continue the good
relations between this country and the Soviet Uni<ni.
As for the Red Dean of Canterbury, I certairdy never welcomed
him at Madison Square Garden or anywhere else.
I never met him. I surmise that the fact that my name remained
on the sponsor list longer than it should have is the explanation of
this incident.
I have no recollection of sponsoring the dinner in question but, since
it was given in honor of President Roosevelt, it would not seem in-
appropriate had I done so.
American Lawyers" Committee on American Relations with Spain:
Now for the group connected with Spain, This committee was appar-
ently working early in 1939 to lift the embargo on Spain, which was
defeated by the combined efforts of revolutionary forces within that
country plus Hitler and Mussolini. This organization is not on any
subversive list that I can find, and I was on it.
Washington Committee To Lift the Spanish Embargo : As for the
Washington committee I can find nothing on this in my files and I
have no 4"ecollection whatsoever.
The Abraham Lincoln Brigade probably belongs in here too. I
have no recollection or documentation for this whatever. Further-
more, if the petition which they say I signed really contained a charge
that war hysteria was being whipped up by the Roosevelt adminis-
tration, it is inconceivable that I could have signed it, since I myself
was then passionately pro-ally and in process of trying to force our
Government into greater and greater activity in their behalf rather
than less. I refer to that matter later.
xVmerican Committee for Democracy and Intellectual Freedom :
I have no recollection or documentation in respect to signing a peti-
tion in my files. I do have correspondence, however, showing that
in 1940 I accepted membership on a citizens' committee to promote
free public education. The letterhead lists many distinguished col-
182 STATE DEPARTMETSTT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
lege presidents and professors, including- Miss Park, the former presi-
dent of Bryn Mawr, and Prof. Harold Urey. This organization is
not on the Attorney General's list.
Greater New York Emergency Conference on Inalienable Rights :
I can find nothing on this in my files, and I have no recollection of it,
but I find a press clipping reporting a meeting held in New York
February 15, 1940, at which Newbold Morris and Mary Woolley, for-
mer president of Mount Holyoke College, were listed as speakers.
Advisory Board of Film Audiences for Democracy, and Advisory
Board of Films for Democracy : I can find nothing on either of these
organizations in my files, and there is nothing in my memory. I may
possibly have made a speech before them. Neither of them are on
any subversive list that I can find.
Schappes Defense Committee; Daily Worker Letter on Simon W.
Gerson; American Committee for Anti-Nazi Literature; Advisory
Committee of the Citizens' Committee To Aid Stril»ng Seamen; and
Milk Consumers' Protective Committee : 1 can find nothing on any
of these matters in my files and have no memory of them except a
vague recollection of the Gerson and Schappes controversies. If I
pai'ticipated in either of them in any way I have completely forgotten
it and I am certain that I never approved or endorsed Communist
activities in those or any other matters.
Congress of American Women: This is one organization T know
something about. It is the American affiliate of the Women's Inter-
national Democratic Federation, a wholly Moscow controlled body
over which I have been battling with Mme. Popova of the USSR at
the United Nations for all the years since the creation of the Com-
mission on the Status of Women. To charge me with membership in
this organization is nothing short of fantastic.
This completes the roster of specific charges.
One general charge remains, my "constant adherence to the * * *
part}^ line," as evidenced by this alleged multiplicity of associations,
actually boiled down to a handful and most of them before 1940.
Well, how about it ? Is this all I have done ? Is this the whole of my
life? Em])hatically, no. I have done many other things, some of
them strangely inconsistent with the party line, some of them in flat
contradiction to it. Let's look at the record in the round and not just
a distorted fragment.
In the early years of my life I Iniew very little and cared less about
Communists. They were an utterly negligible factor in my life. Dur-
ing the thirties, however, as world tension increased, they began show-
ing their hand, and by the end of that period, I, like others, had come
to know and loathe their philosophy. The signing of the Hitler-Stalin
pact in October 1939 suddenly made the issues startlingly clear. I
voiced those issues in a letter I wrote to Alex Rose, secretary of the
American Labor Party, under date of October 10, 1939, as a state-
ment for him to use in conjunction with my candidacy as judge of
the municipal court:
Senator Ttdings. One minute. Judge Kenyon, please.
Miss Kenyox. May I proceed, Mr. Chairman ?
Senator Ttdings. Just a second, please.
Miss Kenton. There are three particularly important paragraphs.
Senator Ttdings. Do you want to put the whole thing in the record?
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 183
Miss Kexyox. Yes; but I would like to read now the significant
I!ai-aij:rai)lis.
Senator Tydings. Go right ahead. This will be exhibit 50.
]\[iss Ken YON (reading) :
First, I regard witli lionor mihI loathing the Hitler-Stalin pact.
Se<()iul. 1 ;ii;i-ec with you tliiit any fnsinji' of the hrown and red dictatorships
is a treaclierons hlow to worhl civilization.
Tliird. 1 also aiiree, insofar as I understand them, with the President's pro-
posed clianges in our present neutrality law. But frankly I have been far too
liusy lately ti-yiuf;- to he as g:ood a .iudjje as possible to have given such legislation
the careful study it reijuii-es.
Fourth, it is not easy for nie to he neutral when I think of either Hitler or
Stalin but I try not to lose my head and I continue to believe in the traditional
American civil liberties. Above all 1 hope that we may keep at peace and still
preserve American democracy.
Fifth, it goes witlunit saying for I should have thought it did) that I am
not a Communist or anything even remotely resembling one. I am just an old-
fashioned believer in democracy who gets awfully weary sometimes of all its
ructions but would never, never give it up.
Senator Tydings. That is dated October 10, 1939 ?
Miss Kenyon. Yes ; that is right.
Events moved so quickly after that, by February 1940, we had been
forced to form a liberal and labor committee, of which I was a mem-
ber, vice president, to safeguard the American Labor Party and to
fight the Ccmmunist attempt to capture it.
I have already presented you with thiit document, Mr. Chairman.
At the same time the American Civil Liberties Union found it neces-
sar}' to purge from its own board all nonbelievers in civil liberties.
This action barred from its governing councils anyone ''who is a
member of any political organization which support^ totalitarian
dictatorshi]^ in any country, or who by his public declarations indi-
cates his sup])ort of such a principle." Within this category we in-
clude organizations in the United States supporting the totalitarian
governments of the Soviet Union and of the Fascist and Nazi coun-
tries — such as the Communist Party and the German-American Bund
and others; as well as native organizations with obvious antidemo-
cratic objectives and practises. Needless to say, I was not one of those
purged, and I am still a member of that board.
The Communist party line in 1040— tl was antiwar, anti-French and
anti-British.' But that was not my line. Being, on the contrary,
passionately i)ro-French and pro-British I became increasing!}'
anxious to aid them as the months passed by, first by all means short
of war and later by wai* itself if need be.
I was one of the original members of the so-called William Allen
White Committee to Defend America by Aiding the Allies. William
Allen White in a telegram iuYited me to join, saying:
Here is a life and death struggle for every jirinciple we cherish in America,
for freedom of speech, of religion, of the ballot, and of every freedom that up-
holds the dignity of the human spirit. Here all the rights that the common man
has fought for during a thousand yeai's are menaced. Terrible as it may seem,
the people of our counti\v cannot avoid the consequences of Hitler's victory or
of those who are or may be allied with him. A totalitarian victory would wipe
out hope for a just and lasting peace.
I submit a copy of the complete telegram of William Allen White.
vSenator Tydings. And the date of that is June 19, 1940 i
Miss Kenyon. June 19, 1940.
6S970 — 50 — pt. 1 13
184 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVEISTIGATION
I think the telegram was sent a bit before that, but that was after
the connnittee was organized.
I favored giving Great Britain overage destroyers, I favored lend-
lease, selective service, et cetera, et cetera. I made many speeches
during that period extolling freedom, urging aid to the Allies and
criticizing the isolationists and the Communists alike for their opposi-
tion.
On May 26, 1941 — a month before Hitler attacked Kussia — I joined
with other members of that committee in an open letter to the President
of the United States, in effect inviting him to declare war on the dic-
tators. It read in part :
We cannot close our eyes to the wholesale murder of liberty * * * The
dictators have extended their world war and world revolution from continent
to continent * * * The challenge is inescapable. We know that strong
action, even armed action, will be required of us.
This was signed, among many others, by Mrs. J. Borden Harriman
and Ambassador Lewis W. Douglas.
I am attaching a photostat of that letter.
Shall I i^roceed, Mr. Chairman ?
Senator Tydings. You may proceed. That will be exhibit 51.
]\Iiss Kenyon. All right, thank you.
This history of my efforts during the crucial years 1940-41 hardly
needs any gloss but it should give pause to those who dare to call me a
Communist.
After Russia had been attacked we all changed our viewpoint
slightly and many of us made earnest efforts to be friends with our
new allies. I do not apologize for that impulse or effort. I think
it was right and good.
However, we failed. AAHien the war ended the cold war began and
it is intensifying. I have been in the thick of it. Confronted with
Madame Popova of the U. S. S. R. at the United Nations I have had a
fidit on my hands from the outset. At the first meeting of our
Commission on the Status of Women held in February 1947, she
sought preferential treatment for her particular pet organization,
the "Women's International Democratic Federation — of wijtiich the
Congress of American Women is the United States affiliate. I battled
her on eight different occasions during that first meeting on that one
issue alone, practically single-handed since most of the other delegates
did not yet know what it was all about. They know now, however.
The re])orts and summary records of the Commission's proceedings
tell the tale.
The struggle went on at subsequent commission meetings. It
reached its peak at Beirut, Lebanon, last spring — see New York Times
clipping of March 26, 1949, which I have here to present to you.
Senator Tydixos. Do you want to put that in the record at this
point ?
Miss Kenyon. We only have the one copy.
Senator Tydings. Put 'that in the record at this point, if you have
the original copy.
Miss Kenyon. Yes.
Senator McMahon. Are you mentioned in that clipping?
Miss Kenyon. Certainly.' Madame Popova and I are it.
Senator Tydings. Just hold up for a moment, please.
Senator Green. I request that it be put in.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INATPTIGATION 185
Senator Ttdings. It has been requested, Judge Kenyon, if you do
not mind, if you identify the article by the paper in which it appeared,
and tlie date under which it appeared, and read the article into the
record.
Miss Kenyox. You want me to read it now ?
Senator Tydings. If you please.
Miss Kknyon. There are two of them.
Senator Tyuings. Two?
Miss Kenyon. One is dated March 2G. 1949, and the other is dated
December 16, 1948.
Shall I read the first one first?
Senator Tydings. I think it would be wiser if you were to read
the first one first.
Do you have a copy of the first one ?
Miss Kenyon. I have, but not of the second one.
This, Mr. Chairman, appeared in the New York Times under date
of Thursday, December 16, 1948, and this is a speech I made in New
York City.
The headline says: "Dorothy Kenyon says women's equality with
men in Russia is one of slavery."
"Women in Russia undoubtedly have more equality in a greater variety of
j(/bs than do American women, but it is an equality of sslavery," Dorotliy Kenyon,
United States delegate to the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women,
declared here yesterday.
At a luncheon of the Women's City Club of New York at the New Weston
Hotel, Miss Kenyon charged that statements by Prof. A. P. Pavlov and other
Soviet Union delegates at recent United Nations sessions that women in the
United States and Great Britain were living in slavery were for political con-
sumption abroad. .She said non-Russian delegates were placed on the defensive,
and she intended to take the offensive at the next commission meeting.
"The Rus.sians have made a lot of noise aI)out equality, but I wonder whether
women there are any more in the driver's seat than they are in this country,"
she said. "I have never been able to discover any Soviet woman, except for
Alexandra Kollontay, for many years their Minister to Sweden, in a position of
real power."
Pointing out there never had been a woman member of the Politburo and that
there was now none either on the central committee of the Communist Party, she
said the Russians made much propaganda of the fact that 21 percent of the
Supreme Soviet is made up of women. But she contended that this was of no
significance, as the body sits only a few days a year for unanimous approval of
Goveriunent proposals. In newspaper pictures of Moscow celebrations, she
declaicd, "there are not even women used as window-dressing."
Alrhough she said the United States should place more women in the Cabinet
and have more Representatives in Congress, Miss Kenyon pointed out that at
least liere they were not prevented from running for office. But in Russia, she
declared, "not one of our Russian sisters has run for election as we know it,"
but are merely handpicked if the Connnunist Party cliooses them to run.
"If women are to achieve recognition as equal citizens the world over, we had
better admit our diftieulties and team up to help each other meet them." she
declared. "Paper participation in government is too flimsy a foundation to
advance the principles of democracy or of women's rights."
Shall I read the next one now, Mr. Chairman?
Senator Tydings. What is the committee's pleasure?
Senator IMcMahon, Yes.
Senator Tit)ings. Yes, read the next one.
Miss Kenyon. This is a little long.
It was before I went to Lebanon.
Senator Tydings. Identify the article, please.
Miss Kenyon. This appeared in the New York Times under date
of Saturday, March 26, 1949.
186 STATE DEPARTMEXT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY IXVESTIGATION
The lieadlines are '"United States, Soviety women clash on rig^hts of
wives of foreigners nnder Russian restrictions."
Then, it says :
Beirut, Lebanon, March 25. — ^A long and bitter attack on the United States by
Soviet delegate Elizavieta A. Popova was strongly opposed here today by other
delegates of the United Nations Coniniission on the Status of Women. These
delegates included Judge Dorothy Kenyon of the United States who pleaded
that the commission be permitted to get on with its work.
The Soviet representative's criticism of alleged racial discrimination and other
faults of United States society followed Judge Kenyon's presentation of a pro-
posal for the convention to guarantee women's freedom to <'hoose their nationality.
The aim of the projiosal is to adjust the tangle of legislation that endangers
women's status through international marriage, she said.
Judge Kenyon again brought into the foreground the reason for the Soviet
opposition, which had caused a crisis previously in the commission's transac-
tions — the Russian refusal to permit Soviet citizens married to foreigners to
reside abroad with their husbands.
Describing this policy as an outrageous ]inutati<in on the rights of women,
Judge Kenyon said that in addition to the Russian wives of British subjects
there were now 350 Russian wives of United States citizens who could not leave
Russia with their husl»ands and 65 Russian husbands of American girls who were
equally restricted.
The principal business of the present meeting has been to lay the ground-
work for a convention and the implementation of treaties to disentangle the
maze of conflicting regulations of various countries on the subject of a woman's
nationality after marriage to a man of another nationality.
The United Nations Secretariat has prepared elaborate studies of the law and
treaties. However, the Soviet delegate i-ejected tlie whole project before dis-
cussion of any data had begun. She said :
"This is not a matter for the Commission on the Status of Women to study.
Our problem is discrimination against women. Why was this problem brought
to our attention at all?"
She then charged discrimination in the United States and gave no further
attention to the nationality issue. She said that 15 States of the United States
prohibited mixed marriages between Negroes and whites, that 5 prohibited mar-
riages with Malays and 5 with Indians, and demanded to know where the prin-
ciple of women's fi'eedom of choice existed in the United States.
Slie added that in some States officials were punished for issuing licenses for
mixed marriages and that in Mississippi any propaganda for mixed marriages
or even equality was prohibited.
Judge Kenyon indicated that only recognition of a woman's right to choose
her own nationality as freely as man would be the solution. This view was op-
posed later by a spokesman for the Catholic Feminine League who pleaded for
the principle of unity of the family. She said that a man and a woman were
not equal in all things, though equal in dignity, and that they had different
functions in society.
The commission adopted a resolution calling for investigation by the United
Nations of the application to women throughoiit the world (jf penal and police
procedure. This is expected to be opposed by Russia since it would involve an
investigation of penal labor camps.
That is the conclusion of that, Mr. Chairman.
May I proceed ?
Senator Tydings. You may proceed.
Miss Kenyon. The culmination of it was when, after bitter debate
over many things, including equal pay for equal work, I finally de-
manded of Mme. Popova whether women received equal pay for equal
work in the Soviet slave labor camps.
The issue was always slavery versus freedom. I raised the point
over and over again in writing, speeches, at meetings, even over
the Voice of America.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY IXVEISTIGATION 187
Eventuall}' Moscow answered back. Maria Sharikova, assistant
chairnian of the Moscow Soviet on the rights of women is reported
on January 5, 1949, to have said:
I>oi-orliy Keiiyoii, in endeavoring to conceal her reactionary stand has engaged
in slandering tlie Soviet people, in particular Soviet women. In a radio broad-
cast over the Voice of Amei-ica, she talks a lot of irresponsible drivel attempting
to deny tiie political, economic, and social equality enjoyed by the women of the
U. S. S. K.. at the same time painting a glowing picture of the position of women
in Britain and the United States, when she knows full well what their position
really is. "I am shocked at this shameful downright lie, completely unsupported
by the tiniest fact." As it happens, Di»rothy Kenyon could not quote facts for
that would at once disprove her assertions.
Dorothy Kenyon had engaged in slandering the "freest women on earth, the
women of the U. S. S. R." However, as any of the thousands of visitors to the
r. S. S. K. can witness, "the slander indulged in by Doorthy Kenyon can hood-
wink no one."
Mr. Charintan, I offer that entire gem in evidence as exhibit 52.
That is a State Department release quoting that release from Moscow
in toto.
This is my defense. "\Miat does it add up to? With all the mis-
takes and errors of judgment which the best of us can and do commit
only too frequently, I submit that the record proves without question
that I am a lover of democracy, of individual freedom and of human
riglits for eveiybod}', a battler, perhaps a little bit too much of a
battler sometimes, for the rights of the little fellow, the under dog,
the fellow who gets forgotten or frightened or shunned because of
unpopular views: but who is a human being just the same and entitled
to be treated like one. The converse of these things; dictatorship,
cruelty, oppression, and slavery are to me intolerable. I cannot live
in their air, I must fight back. This is not perhaps a very wise or
prudent way to live but it is my way. It has got me into hot water
before and probably will again. But my faith in people and my
impulse to fight for them is my religion and it is the light by which
I live. I also believe that it is America. There is not a Communist
bone in my body.
This is a matter of grave consequence to me. Literally overnight,
whatever personal and professional reputation and standing I may
have acquired after many years in private practice and some in public
oiRce. they have been serioush' jeopardized, if not destroyed by the
widespread disseminaiton of charges of Communistic leanings or
proclivities that are utterly false. The truth may never catch up
witli the lie, but insofar as I can. I desire to regain as much of what
I have lost as possible and I have faith that this subconunittee will
see that justice is done. Of course, I am more than willing to attempt
to answer any questions the members of this subcommittee, or anyone
permitted by the subcommittee, may care to ask. I conclude with an
expression of my appreciation of the opportunity and privilege af-
forded me so promptb', to answer these charges at this public hearing.
Senator Tydings. I will ask our guests, no matter wdiat the testi-
mony may be, whether it pleases them or displeases them, to kindly
refrain from any applause or any other demonstration, because if
we permit it in one case, we will have to permit it in another, and we
are trying to conduct a very careful investigation and we would
appreciate if those who come, no matter what your impulses may be,
would not give us any demonstration.
188 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
Senatoi' Hickenlooper, would you like to ask the witness any ques-
tions?
Senator Hickenlooper. Yes, Mr. Chairman, I would like to canvass
the situation a little bit with Judge Kenyon.
I want to say, al the outset, Mr. Chairman, that I told the com-
mittee that while I thought it was perfectly proper to have Judge
Kenyon come here and make such a statement as she cared to make,
that I felt that no adequate or satisfactory canvass of the situation
surrounding the accusations of Judge Kenyon's membership in these
organizations which have been declared subversive by various public
bodies, could be had without full and complete access, prior access to
the investigative files in connection with Judge Kenyon.
The committee has not seen fit to produce those investigating files
for my perusal at this point, so that I feel that any examination at
this time, while perhaps eventually adequate, I cannot be certain that
it has a sufficient background of all the facts upon which to base ques-
tions, but I do have some questions I would like to ask Judge Kenyon
if I may.
In the first place, I would like to canvass some of these organiza-
tions, and I may say, Mr. Chairman, that my questions are based en-
tirely upon my understanding that Senator McCarthy did not charge
Judge Kenyon with being personally subversive or with being a
Conununist. I believe the charges went to the point of charging her
Avith membership in a substantial number of organizations which have
been declared subversive by various public bodies.
Senator Tydings. May I interrupt ?
Senator Green. May I reply to that?
Senator Tydings. Let me read the resolution.
Senator Green. May I reply to that point ?
Senator Tydings. All right. ,
Senator Hickenlooper. May you reply? I am stating my under-
standing.
Senator Green. I think you have misunderstood the purpose of the
resolution, which was read at the beginning of this hearing.
The purpose of the resolution is to authorize and direct us to in-
vestigate charges of disloyalty, so the charges that were made against
Miss Kenyon were charges of disloyalty. That is what she directed
her answers to, and it seems to me that further questions ought to be
directed to that point.
Senator Hickenlooper. Do I understand that the Senator
Senator Tydings. Just a minute. There is evidently a dispute
here. Let the chairman read the resolution himself, and he will take
no further part in it :
That the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, or any duly authorized sub-
committee thereof, is authorized and directed to conduct a full and complete
study and investigation as to whether persons who ai-e disloyal to the United
States are or have been employed by the Department of State.
Proceed.
Senator Hickenlooper. If the subcommittee is to be limited to the
very artful interpretation that is now apparently put on the resolution,
then I certainly should be handicapped and completely limited in the
questions I think should be asked in the general public interest of
examining this matter.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVEISTIGATION 189
Senator Tydixgs. Go ahead with your question.
Senator Hickexloopeh. Judge, I believe that you were alleged to
have been a member of the Consumers National Federation Conference
Connnittee, or the Consumers National Federation, which was cited
as a Communist front by the Special Committee on Un-American
Activities, in its report of March 29, 1944, and in 1943, by the Cali-
fornia Committee on Un-American Activities; and by the New York
City Council Committee on Investigating the Municipal Civil Service
Commission.
I have a photostat, alleging that it is copied
i\Iiss Kenyon. Give me the name again, Senator, because I have not
heard that name before.
Senator Hickexlooper. Consumers National Federation. I have a
photostat of your name among the list of individual sj)onsors of that
organization.
Sliss K.EXYOX. And the date ?
Senator Hickexlooper. December 11 and 12, 1937, apparently this
document was published. You may see it if you like.
Miss Kex-^yox. I would be very happy to, yes.
This, Mr. Chairman, is not one of the organizations which was in
the public print that I had, that was released last week. I remember
nothing about it.
Senator Hickexlooper. The list of names is on the second page.
MissIvEx^YOx. Yes.
I will tell you. Senator, what I remember, if I have got the name
correct, because there are an awful lot of names that are very con-
fusing, and it is difficult to tell.
I have a recollection of a group concerned with consumers' problems
that was formed around the middle of the thirties, about this date,
probably, and that I went and made a speech at one of their meetings,
and that I was probably perhaps connected with for a little while and
later I decided that I did not like the tone or complexion or company
that I was keeping, and I got out very early and washed my hands
of it and never had anything to do with it for many, many years.
I do not know what my files may show, but that is my recollection.
Senator Hickexlooper. Do you have any recollection of that par-
ticular organization, or your sponsorship ?
Miss Kexyox. That is what I say I think I am talking about — that
organization. That is my recollection — of one where I did not like
the company. I w^ent and made a speech and did not like the company
I was keeping and after a very few months, I got out and had nothing
further to do with it.
Senator Hickex-^looper. Do you recall whether you got out by
writing a letter of resignation, or just not going?
]\Iiss IVEXYOX. I cannot recall anything about that. I only know,
Senator, my recollection is I washed my hands of it long ago, because
I suspected the people. I will be very glad to look it up in my files
und see if I can find anything further.
Senator Hickexlooper. As far as you recall, you attended just one
meeting of the organization?
Miss Kex'yox. That is right. That is what I remember — making
a speech on consumers' problems, a very good speech and they liked
it, and I think they asked me to be a sponsor. That was my
misfortune.
190 STATE DEPARTME^'T EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVEISTIGATTON
Senator Hickenlooper. Do you recall the American Committee for
Democracy and Intellectual Freedom, in New York City ?
Miss Kenyon. I think I made a speech there. That was not one
of the names given by Senator McCarthy last week, this is a new one
^"s^nator Hickenlooper. I have a photostat, alleged to be a copy of
the list of sponsoring people, and you are listed as Dorothy Kenyon,
former instice, New York City. This organization was cited as a
Communist front bv the Committee on Un-American Activities m
1942 and 1044; by the California Committee on Un-American Ac-
tivities, in their report in 1948 ; cited as subversive and un-American
by the special committee of the House Committee on Appropriations,
xYpril -21, 1948. -, t i . 4-
Miss Kenyon. What is that ? I beg your pardon, I do not want
to interrupt. „ „ ,. ^- • ^- <)
What did you say ; what was the date allegedly ot my participation j
Senator Hickenlooper. You understand, I have no hrst-hand
knowledge, and these are alleged to be photostatic copies ot tlie
documents.
Miss Kenyon. I understand. i . . ^
Senator Hickenlooper. This is dated, according to the photostat,
January 17, 1940. Your name appears on the second page of the
photostat, if you care to see it— you may. i u ^
Miss Kenyon. Wait a minute. I am afraid I am contused about
this. Whatisthenameof that organization?
Senator Hickenlooper. American Committee for Democracy and
Intellectual Freedom. ,
Miss Kenyon. Oh, I beg your pardon. It is one of the ones 1
mentioned. Senator, and I have a statement m my file I ]ust read
my statement in respect to that. I said that what I did, according
to mv record, was to accept membership on a citizens committee to
promote free public education. The letterhead lists many distin-
guished college presidents, including INIiss Park, former president ot
Bryii Mawr, and Professor Urey. . • • .
1 also believe I am correct in saying that the organization is not
on the Attorney General's list. It had an astounding number ot
presidents of colleges on it— most impressive. ^ , ^ ^ ^
Senator Hickenlooper. Would you look at this alleged photostat
and see if you are referrintr specifically to that organization whose
name appears at the top ? there are some of these organizations hav-
ing similar names. ^,T^ 1VT r^ ^^ T)-f
Miss Kenyon. "President Marion Park, Brvn Mawr College; rrot.
Harold Urey." This is the same one, yes. There are lots of other
college presidents there too— very fine gentlemen. • ^. ,
Senator Hickenlooper. Did von withdraw from this organization ?
Miss Kenyon. I had nothing to do with it, sir, according to my
records except to serve for a short period on this Committee to
Promote Free Public Education— just one single ad hoc committee
for one specific job. I don't know what we did.
Senator Hickenlooper. You are not connected with it now, then ?
Miss Kenyon. I never have been since 1940, if that is the date on
it I was only connected with it then to that extent.
Senator Hickenlooper. I have another photostat of an alleged
pro<^rani of the Greater New York Emergency Conference on Inalien-
state: departme^s't employee loyalty investigation 191
nblc Rifilits, 'J1iis is Monday, February 12, 1940. I1ie ]^hotostat is
alleged to be of a list of members of the general conmiittee. This
ora-anization is cited as a Conmuniist front, which was succeeded by
the National Federation for Constitutional Liberties. That citation
Avas by the Special Committee on Un-American Activities in their
report March '2d, IJU-i; also cited by the Congressional Conmiittee on
Un-Aniei-ican Activities, report Xo. 115, September 2, 11J47; cited as
a Connnunist front by the California Connnittee on Un-x\merican
Activities, report. 1948.
Do you recall that organization?
Miss Kenyon. Yes. I have mentioned that ali-eady, to say that
all my records showed, and it nnist be ihe same meeting that wou are
talking about — was a meeting held in New York. I thought it was
February 15, 1940, and Newbold Morris, who is not mayor of New
York, aiid Mary Woolley, former president of Mount Holyoke College,
were listed as the speakers in this clip}Mng that I had.
Senator Tydings. Who is Newbolcl Morris, so we will know who
he is.
Miss Kexyon. He was president of the city council for 12 years
when Mayor LaGuardia was president. He ran last fall for mayor
against jSIayor O'Dwyer. He is a liberal too.
Senator (Ireen. In order that the record may be complete, on what
ticket did Mr. Morris run for mayor?
Miss Kexyon. Well, Senator, 1 think he ran on the Republican
ticket. That is probably why I voted for O'Dwyer.
Excuse me. Senator Hickenlooper.
Senator Hickenlooper. I notice it is the occasional Republican who
belongs to one of these organizations that can be pointed to.
Mr. KiEKDL. I am on your side on that. Senator.
Miss Kenyon. Guilty by association.
Senator Hickenlooper. Is this organization still in existence that
3'ou know of ?
Miss Kenyon. Wliat, this Inalienable Rights?
Senator Hickenlooper. This (xreater New York Emergency Con-
ference on Inalienable Rights.
Miss IvENYON. I haven't the faintest idea. I can't even remember
it. All I can find Avas this clipping in my files, 1940.
Senator Hickenlooper. Now the testimonial dinner in honor of
Ferdinand C. Smith, on /6'eptember 20, 1944, at the Hotel Commodore,
in New^ York. I have a photostat alleging to be a copy of the list of
sponsors containing your name. Were you a sponsor of that or-
ganization ?
Miss Kenyon. I haven't any recollection. That is also a new one
on me. It wasn't included in the list that Senator McCarthy gave last
year. When was that, and what was the man's name?
Sen.ator Hickenlooper. September 20, 1944, testimonial dinner in
honor of Ferdinand C. Smith at the Hotel Commodore in New York.
You may see this, if it will refresh your memory.
Miss Kenyon. Thank you very much. Was he a Negro?
Senator Hickenlooper. I don't know. The allegation was made,
I believe, that he is a prominent Communist.
Miss Keny^on. Do you mean at the dinner ?
Senator Hickenloopzil I don't know about at the dinner.
192 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY IN^EISTIGATION
Miss Kenyon. Excuse me a moment. I don't remember anything-
about this. I haven't any recollection of it.
Senator Hickenloopek. Your name is on the second page.
Miss Kenyon. Yes, "in recognition of his outstanding service to-
labor, the Negro people, and the Nation."
I may have fallen for the fact that he is a member of the Negro race.
That was a mistake like LaGuardia's occasional mistakes. It was a
beaut.
Senator Hickenlooper. Do you recall attending the dinner ?
Miss Kenyon. I don't know the individual. I don't recall having-
att ended the dinner. I don't go to dinners if I can lielp myself.
Senator Hickenlooper. The American Connnittee for Anti-Nazi
Literature, suite 302, 20 Vesey Street, New York City. The photo-
stat is alleged to be a copy of a letter, or photostat of the letterhead
of that organization, upon which your name appears as a sponsor.
Miss Kenyon. What is the date ? May I see it '?
Senator Hickenixioper. March 24, 1939. You may see it, of course.
Miss Kenyon. I reported on this in my statement. I said I could
find absoliitely nothing in my files in regard to it, sir. I see a num-
ber of friends of mine along here on this sponsor list, including-
Prof. John Dewey. I just sponsored a dinner for him this fall. And
Lillian Wakh who is also on the board of the American Civil Liberties
LTnion, and Professor Maclver.
Senator Hickenlooper. Do you have any recollection of it?
Miss Kenyon. No.
Senator Hickenlooper. And you are not now a member of it, nor
a sponsor?
Miss Kenyon. Certainly not.
Senator Hickenlooper. I have an alleged photostatic copy of a
clipping of the Daily Worker of February 10, 1944, containing a story
which I shall show you, headed as follows: "Leading citizens laud'
Isaacs' on Gerson," and it is alleged to be a letter of which they
claim you w^ere one of the signers, in this news story, a letter to Mr.
Isaacs lauding the appointment of S. W. Gerson, former Daily Worker
reporter, as an assistant on Mr. Isaacs' staff.
They print your name as one of the signers of that letter.
Miss Kenton. A Daily Worker clipping, you say ? I never see that
sheet.
Mr. Chairman, I have said that I could find nothing in my record
in respect to Gerson, or any letter or any action of mine iii respect
to it, and I have no recollection of anything except the Gerson con-
troversy itself, which I remember, but the thing that seems to me
extrao7-dinary is that if my memory is right, that Gerson incident was
in 1937 and this is dated 1944. It may not be a very good paper, but
news 7 years old seems a little stale. I would suspect it.
Senator Hickenlooper. I don't know. Judge. You are the one
who either has the recollection or does not have the recollection, and
I am merely asking whether you have any recollection or whether
you did sign such a letter or not.
Miss Kenyon. I have no recollection, and this seems to me in-
credible.
Senator Hicklenlooper. I have heard that term before.
Miss Kenyon. I did not mean to plagiarize.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY IXVEIST I CATION 193
Senator Hickenlooper. In spite of the general sentiment, there is
no monopoly on the term.
Miss Kexyox. It is like "warmonn:erino;.-'
Senator Hiokeni.oopek. Now I have a photostat of an alleged news
story in the Daily Worker of February 21, 1940, in which your name
appears as the signer of a ])rotest to President Roosevelt and Attorney
(teneral Jackson, protesting the attacks upon the Veterans of the
Abraliam Lincoln Brigade and condemning the war hysteria now
being whipped up by the Koosevelt administration. I show you the
photostat. I have no knowledge of it whatsoever.
Miss Kexyon. Thank you ver}^ much. I have already commented
on that. I will just take a look at it now.
So far as I know, I have already referred to this, to say that I
have absolutely no recollection of having done anything of the sort,
and I will say this time it is simply preposterous in relation to my
record, which was almost that of warmongering at that time. It is
undoubtedly a complete and absolute falsehood.
Senator Hickenlooper. I take it that you are quite positive that
you did not sign such a protest ?
Miss IvEXYON. I am as positive as I can be.
Senator Hickexlooper. The National Citizens Political Action
Committee. Do you recall that organization?
]\Iiss Kenyon. I believe that that was the organization of which
Sidney Ilillman was the head, and I was very happy to be a member
of the PAC. I regarded him as a great labor leader and a great citi-
zen and American. I don't need to look at the documentation on that,
Mr. Chairman.
Senator Hickenlooper. You well remember that organization?
Miss Kenyon. Quite.
Senator Hickenlooper. I have a photostat here of a page of the
Daily Worker of February 10, 1944, headed "American women leaders
greet colleagues in U. S. S. R."
INIiss Kenyon. Has that a picture of Dorothy Thompson in the
middle of the page ^
Senator Hickenlooper. It has a picture of Miss Thompson.
Miss Kenyon. I remember that very well indeed. I am proud to
say I did send greetings along with Dorothy Thompson and a lot of
other fine women to the brave women of Russia, who at that time were
our allies and were putting up a wonderful fight. Dorothy Thomp-
son and I both remember it very well, and we are very proud of the
fact that we did it.
Senator Hickenlooper. That was at the National Council of So-
viet-American Friendship; is that true?
Miss Kenyon. L don't know anything about that. We just sent
greetings as individuals. I did not belong to that organization.
Senator Hickenlooper. You did not?
Miss Kenyon. No. I understood we Avere invited as individuals to
join in a Christmas greeting and we did — a lot of us. I think Mrs.
Ogden Reid, of the Herald Tribune, was on it too.
Senator Hickenlooper. I believe j^ou recall the Political Prisoners
Bail Fund Committee in your State ; do you not?
Miss Kenyon. Yes, Senator. I have very little recollection of it
myself. I mostly got it from Mr. Baldwin.
194 STATE DEPARTMENl EMPLOYEE LOYALTY IN^EISTIGATION
Senator Hickenlocper. I have here an alleged photostatic copy of
a letterhead dated January 18, 1935, of the Political Prisoners Bail
Fund Committee, 154 Nassau Street, room l!^00. New York City, and
your name is printed on the side of this alleged photostat as one of
the sponsors. Is that correct ?
Miss Kenyon. I believe so; yes, Mr. Baldwin's name appears
there as trustee; is that correct ?
Senator Htckenlcoper. Mr. Baldwin is the first named as trustee.
Miss Kenyon. Perha])S I had better look at it.
Yes, that is the one. I see Hej^wood Broun's name there too.
Senator Hickenlooper. How long were you a member of that or-
ganization?
Miss Keistyon. It died in lOol or 1935. This must have been its
death agony, I guess. That is vrhat Mr. Baldwin told me. I have
no recollection of it.
Senator Hickenlooper. You are not a member of it at this time?
Miss Kenyon. It liquidated 15 years ago. Senator.
Senator Hickenlooper. It was cited as subversive and Communist
June 1, 1948, and September 21, 1948. It was called a legal arm of
the Connnunist Party by Attorney General Francis Biddle, accord-
ing to the Congressional Eecord of September 24, 1942. It was cited
as 'Tt is essentially the legal defense arm of the Communist Party of
the United States'' by the Special Connnittee on Un-American Activi-
ties, reports, January 3, 1939; also cited in reports, January 3, 1910,
and March 29, 1944, and again by the Congressional Committee on
Un-American Activities in 1947. I have no knowledge as to whether
or not it is still in existence, Init those are the citations.
Miss Kenyon. Senator, I believe you have confused it with the
International Labor Defense. I think what you have been reading
about is the record of the International Labor Defense, with which
I never had anything to do, and it was, so far as 1 know, the arm of
the Connnunist Part3\
Senator Hickenlooper. The Political Prisoners Bail Fund Com-
mittee is alleged to be a subsidiary of the International Labor Defense,
which has been characterized as I have just given you by those reports.
Miss Kenyon. Yes, but I gave you Roger Baldwin's report, which
is to the contrary, and there is no evidence that it is a subsidiary that
I know of, and I have Mr. Baldwin's statement to the contrary. That
is the best I can do in respect to that. Senator.
So far as I am concerned, I have forgotten every single thing
about it.
Senator Hickenlooper. I have a photostat of a letter headed
"Lawyers Committee on American Relations With Spain." This is
dated March 5, 1938. Your name is carried on th-e photostat, appar-
ently in a list of members. At the bottom of the list it says " (partial
list)."
Miss Kenyon. Will you give me the name again? I think I have
covered it.
Senator Hickenlooper. Lawyers Committee on American Rela-
tions With Spain.
Miss Kenyon. Yes, I covered that and said that I belonged to that.
That was in 1938-39, and the purpose of that was, we were working
to get the embargo against the Government of Spain lifted. If you re-
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 195
call tlie situation at that time, the policy of nonintervention 1 believe
was in effect, and was })racticed by everybody except Hitler and
Mussolini, and I have a oood deal of goocl conipany in that list. I
also could not fiiul that orounization on any subversive list. It must
have <»one out of existence.
Senator Hickexlooi'kk. I believe you will find that it was cited by
the Sj^ecial Committee on Un-American Activities, report. March lO,
l'.)44. i)a<res l(iS-109. as "When it was the policy of the Connnunist:
Pai'ty to or<;anize much of its main pro]ia<::anda around the civil war
in Spain" the above "Connnunist lawyers" front or<^anization" sup-
ported this movement.
It was cited as a Communist front. I believe, by the California
Connnittee on Un-American Activities, in their report, 1948, page 835.
Cited, I believe, also by the Xew York City Council connnittee in-
vestigating the municipal civil service commission.
Miss Kenyox. I have told you that I was a member of it in 1939,
for that one specific purj)ose. There are a great many very fine Amer-
ican citizens also included on that list. I had no knowledge Avhat-
soever that it was Connnunist at the time, and I am not sure of it yet..
I have had nothing to do with it since 1939.
Senator HicKEXLoorER. It is not in existence, so far as you know,
at this time^
Miss Kexyox. I understood it was formed for that one purpose, and
then it went out of existence.
Senator Hk'kexi.ooper. I have a photostatic copy of an alleged
political advertisement in the New York Times of October 9, 1944,.
entitled "An Open Letter to Gov. Thomas E. Dewey"' in connection
with the Morris U. Schappes" conviction and asking the Governor to
pardon Mr. Schappes. Your name is listed in this alleged photostat
of the advertisement as one of the signers of the open letter.
Miss Kexyox. I covered that in my statement. I will be very glad
to look at it.
Senator Hickexlooper. I think there is a pencil mark right there
at your name.
Aliss Kexyox. I have absolutely no recollection of that whatever,
Senator. That is one of the matters which I tried to see if I could
find something on to refresh my recollection. I found absolutely
nothing. I remember a long debate in regard to this Schappes case,
and I think the American Civil Liberties Union had the matter
under advisement in respect to a number of possible aspects of civil
liberties in connection with the matter. Of course, in connection
with civil liberties, as you know, we are always having cases come
befoi-e us where it is charged that there has been some violation of"
civil liberties, and it is one of the basic tenets of the American Civil
Liberties Union that every person is entitled to civil liberties, even
if we hate his ideas.
I have no recollection of this or or myself having taken any action:
whatsoever. If I did take any action,' it would have been entirely
because of some civil liberties question which I believed was involved.
Frankly. I don't think I took any action at all. I think I just chewedi
the i-ag the way a lot of others dicl.
Senator Hickexlooper. Then, the inclusion of your name in that
advertisement as one of the sponsoi-s was entirely without youi- consent
or a])i)roval ; would you say?
196 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
Miss Kenyon. No, I can't be sure of that. I simply say I cannot
remember. If it was included, it was only included because of some
civil liberties aspect of the matter so far as I was concerned, but I
have no recollection. -^ i u
Senator HiciiENLOOPER. The Schappes Defense Committee has been
listed by the Special Committee on Un-American Activities m its re-
port of March 29, 1944, as a front organization with a strictly Com-
munist objective, namelv, the defense of a self-admitted Communist
who was convicted of perjury in the courts of New York. It was
listed as a front organization, I am informed, by the California Com-
mittee on Un-American Activities in its report in 1948, page 55.
Miss Kenyon. Mr. Senator, I take it that you are not charging
that I was a member of that committee, but simply that I signed the
letter. Is that correct?
Senator Hickenlouper. Miss Kenyon, I am charging nothing.
Miss Kenyon. I beg your pardon.
Senator Higkenlooper. I am asking for information.
Miss Kenyon. Yes, yes. To clarify, let me say I know I never
was a member of the committee. , . . . i
Senator Hickenlooper. I do not allege that this photostat shows
any membership on anything, except it is alleged that yoii were a
signer of the so-called open letter to Gov. Thomas E. Dewey as
co'iitained in a political advertisement of that date.
Miss Kenyon. And that I may have done, although 1 doubt it.
Senator Hickenlooper. Do you recall the Washington Committee
To Lift the Spanish Embargo ? . -r • i t n « i v.
Miss Kenyon. No. I mentioned that, and I said 1 could tincl ab-
solutely nothing whatsoever about it.
Senator Hickenlooper. I have a photostatic copy ot an allegecl list
of s])onsors, I presume, of this organization: I dont know. It is
l^eaded "These Americans say : 'Lift the Embargo Against Republican
Spain ' ". It is a booklet of the Coordinating Committee to Lift
the Embargo, an auxiliary of North American Committee to Aid
Spanish Democracy. , ^_ „
Under the heading "Lawyers" is listed "Judge Dorothy Kenyon.
I^Iiss Kenyon. Well, I was fighting for that cause. I wanted the
embargo lifted. „ , . , -r <• ^ i. t^
This is one of the causes, Senator, for which I fought It says,
"These Americans say: 'Lift the Embargo Against Eepublican
Spain.' " They say they want the embargo lifted. I did.
Senator Hickenlooper. You signed that ?
Miss Kenyon. That was 1939, was it not?
Senator Hickenlooper. I believe it so.
Miss Kenyon. Yes. , , <. ^^ t „
Senator Hickenlooper. Then I have a photostat ot an alleged page
in the New York Times of January 31, 1949, entitled "An Open
Letter to the Government and the People of the United States, de-
manding that they lift the embargo now.
Miss Kenyon. You mean 1939, not 1949
Senator Hickenlooper. Did I say 1949? Im sorry; 1939. And
at the bottom of this is a list of names, in which your name appears.
I^Iiss Kenyon. I suppose that is the same thing, Senator.
Senator Hickenlooper. I don't know.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 197
Miss Kenyox. There are an awful lot of bishops on this. This is
what I was for. I see some very respectable hiwyers of New York
on there. Harold Rieaehnan's name is there.
Senator HicKKM,(H.ri.:K. The AVashin«rton Committee to Lift the
fepanish Embargo, I am informed, was cited as one of a number of
front oro:anizations set up during the Spanish civil war by the Com-
nnmist Party in the United States and through which the party
carried on a great deal of agitation. That citation is by the Special
1 ommittee On Un-American Activities, report March 2!), 19^:4 padres
lo( and 138. ' i &
Cited as a Communist front bv the California Committee on Un-
American Activities, report, 11)47, page 210. according to the informa-
tion I have.
Miss Kenyon. I certainly had no idea it was Communist, and I
am sure those other Republican New York lawyers did not know it
•either.
Senator HiCKENLoorER. Can't you find any Democratic laywers
on that list ? "^
Miss Kexvox. I think my counsel will be glad to.
Senator Hickf^^looper. Here is a photostatic copy, allegedly, of
a letterhead of Films For Democracy, 342 Madison Avenue, New
1 ork-. Uisted on the side as a member of the advisory board is the
name of Dorothy Kenyon.
Miss Kexyox.' I haVe reported on that already. I will be o-lad
to see the exhibit. ^
I have absolutely no recollection. I see Stanley laacs' name here
I thought perhaps I might have made a speech before it, but I don't
know. '
Senator HicKEXLooPER. Would you sav the inclusion of your
name on the list of advisers was without ymir consent or authoriza-
tion ^
Miss Kexyox. Xo. I wouldn't know. I wouldn't have any idea
about It. This was m 1938, and I couldn't tell vou about th'at. I
Have no recollection whatever. I should have thought that I had
perha])s made a speech before the group.
Senator Hickexlooper. And from that they put your name on
the list { ^ 1. ./
Miss Kexyox. They might very well have. I am inclined to think
tliat they did m a number of cases.
I see Senatoi- Capper here. I think I had some good company,
and it It was Communist then. I certainly did not know^ it
Senator Hickexlooper. I might suggest that on some of these lists
you nad some very bad company as well as good company
Miss Kenyox. You are quite correct. We know that now. We
dul not all knoAv as much then.
Senator Hickexlooper. I am not reading any other names on
^r- T^ -^^^ ^^ '^ matter th.-it concerns you. Judge Kenyon
Miss Kexyox. Yes, I understand. Senator.
Senator Hickexlooper. Films for Democracy was cited as a
Communist-front organization by the Special Committee on Un-
American Activities, report INIarch 2!), 1944, and as a Communist Front
organization which merged with another front. Film Audiences to
become Film Audiences for Democracy. It w^s cited in the year
198 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVEISTIGATION
1939 by the California Committee on Un-American Activities, report
of 1948, according to the information I have.
Miss Kexyox. I also referred to that in my statement, saying that
1 had absolutely no record of it or memory of it. I take it from
wliat you say that one was merged with the other.
Senator Hickenloopek. I doivt know. I am merely quoting from
the report. ^ . ,
Miss Kenyon. And the letterhead on which my name appears was
dated, as you say, January 5, 1938 ? r ^aoo
Senator Hickenlooper. There is a date, January o, 1-J6b.
Miss Kenyon. Yes. , . <• ^- xi
Senator Hickenlooper. Later, according to the information 1 have,
it was merged with another organization to become an organization
known as Film Audiences for Democracy, m 1939.
Miss Kenyon. That I know nothing about. . ..^ -p
Senator Hickenlooper. I have an alleged photostat of a letter ot
Film \udiences for Democracy, 342 Madison Avenue, iSew York, i
do not have the date on this one, but on the advisory board, on the
side of this letterhead, is the name of Dorothy Kenyon. Ihat is the
merged organization.
Miss Kenyon. I know nothing whatever about it.
Senator Hickenlooper. I take it, then, that your name was put on
there without your consent or approval. , , •, ^
Miss Kenyon. I have no recollection, Senator, whether it was or not.
I doubt that I ever had anything to do with it, but I cannot be sure.
I have led a reasonably full life, and this was a long time ago.
Senator Hickenlooper. Then you might have been a member ot
this ^
Miss Kenyon. It is possible I might have, but if I did I will repeat
again that I had no ideas that it was Communist then, and 1 haven t
anv idea what it is now. , ^^ , .
Senator Hickenlooper. The Special Committee on Un-American
-ictivities, in their report of INIarch 29, 1944, cited it as a Communist
front I have the citation book here if there is any question about
the citation. And the California Committee on Un-American Activ-
ities, in its report in 1948, said ^'The (^ommunist fronts, Film Audi-
ences and Films for Democracy, merged in 1939 to form a new front,
Film Audiences for Democracy.''
I am told the New York City Council Committee Investigating tlie
Municipal Civil Service Commission cited it as "an organization ot
Communist complexion." -,.-,, - r^ v^-
Do you remember whether you canvassed the American Committee
for Democracy and Intellectual Freedom ?
Miss Kenyon. I think we discussed that previously, did we noU
Yes, that's right. I have mentioned it, you have it, I mentioned it,
and' nov,' von mention it again. . ,, ^ • +• »
Senator Hickenlooper. Were you a member of that organization ?
Miss Kenyon. I told vou that I, in 1940, accepted membership in
an ad hoc Citizens Committee to Promote Free Public Education. 1
have never heard of it since.
That is the one which had all of the college presidents on it, it
you will recall.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 199
Senator Hickenlooper. There was a meetino-, I am told, according
(o this photostat which 1 have here and which 1 will hand you,
>|H)nsoro(l, I believe, by that organization on April lo, 11)40, and under
the heading "Tliese people sponsored this meeting'' is the name of
Dorothy Kenyon.
Miss Kf.xyon. 1 have no recollection, but I may have.
Senator IIickexloopeh. Vou would not say that you did not ? You
would not positively state that you did not sponsor it i
JNIiss Kenyon. That meeting^
Senator Hickenloopeu. That particidar meeting.
Miss Kenyon. I may have. It was, 1 believe, in that same year
that 1 was accepting membership on this committee. It would not be
inconsistent if I did. I repeat that I had no idea at that time that it
was Connnunist. 1 saw Alvin Johnson's name there, and I am sure
he did not think it was Connnunist either.
Senator Hickenlooper. It was cited by the Special Committee
on Un-American Activities in its report for June 15, 1942, and also
on ^larch '29. 1944. as a C\)mnuniist front which defended Commu-
nist teachers. The California Conunittee on Un-American Activi-
ties, in its report in 1948, says :
This Communist front was establislied on Lincoln's birthday in 1939. The
activities of this group were always in l)ehalt of comnmnisni. It has followed
the Communist Party line as it switclied and squirmed in support of tlie foreign
policy of Soviet Russia.
It was cited as subversive and un-American b}^ the Special Sub-
connnittee of the House Committee on Appropriations report, April
2i, 1943.
1 ha^e a photostat, allegedly, of the letterhead of the Citizens'
C{jnnnittee to Aid Striking Seamen, 277 West Twenty-second Street,
Xew York City, with a letter Avhich is apparently a form letter photo-
graphed on this letterhead. On the side, under the heading "Ad-
visory Conunittee", among others, appears the name of Dorothy Ken-
yon. This letter is dated January 28, 1937. Were you a member of
that organization?
Miss Keny'on. I have already reported on that. I could find
absolutel}' nothing in my files, and I have absolutely no recollection.
I have been sympathetic in a number of strikes, and it is perfectly
possible that I may have sympathized with this. I know nothing
about it whatsoever.
Senator Hickenlooper. The Special Committee on Un-American
Activities in December 1944, in a report in appendix IX, I believe —
there is a typographical bobble here — cited it as a Communist front.
Miss Kenyon. At that time?
Senator Hickenlooper. The report was made in December 1944.
The date of the letter that I have is 1937.
Miss Kenyon. I certainly did not know that it was Comnuniist if
it was Connnunist, nor am I snre that I was on it.
Senator Hickenlooper. I do not know whether you were or not,
Judge. I merely showed yon the ])hotostat with the name "Dorothy
Kenyon"' on the side as a member of the advisory committee.
I have a photostat of a letterhead of the Conference on Pan Am-
erican Democracy, with oflices at 156 Fifth Avenue, New York. It
68970 — 50 — pt. 1 —14
200 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
is dated November 16, 1938, and in the list of sponsors printed on
the left-hand side of the letterhead is the name of Dorothy Kenyon.
Miss Kenyon. I have covered that already in my statement.
Senator Hickexloopeb. Just to refresh my recollection, were you
one of the sponsors of the organization ?
Miss Kenyon. Yes. I said that. I found the letterhead in my
file dated March 4, 1939, and I remember making a speech before that
organization, I think in 1938. On the letterhead was the name of
Senator Paul H. Douglas, Quincy Howe, Stanley Isaacs, and Dr.
Ralph W. Sockman, all good friends of mine. I didn't know the
Communists on it, if there were some.
Senator Hickenloopkr. I believe it is alleged there were some on it.
Miss KoNYON. I believe those gentlemen that I named were not
Conimunists or even considered so by this committee.
Senator Hickenlooper. Are you still a member of that organiza-
tion ?
Miss Kenyon. I have never heard of it in 10 or more years.
Senator Hickenlooper. Did you ever withdraw from it?
Miss I^nyon. Acording to this letterhead, I was a sponsor in 1939.
Senator Hickenlooper. 1938 is the date of this letter.
Miss Kenyon. I m sorry. The letter I have in my files is 1939.
I'm sorry.
Senator Hickenlooper. Then if this photostat is an accurate re-
production, you wei'e a sponsor in 1938, and also according to your
own letterhead in 1939 ?
Miss Kenyon. That's right. I told you it was in my file, which
brought me up a whole year longer than what you have.
Senator Hickenlooper. When was the last time you had any con-
nection at all with this organization ?
Miss Kenyon. So far as I know, March 4, 1939. I have never
heard of it since. I have difficulty remembering even this connec-
tion with it.
Senator Hickenloopeh. Attorney General Tom Clark's letters
to the Loyalty Review Board, released June 1, 1948, and September
21, 1948, cited it as subversive and Communist. It was cited as Com-
munist front by the Special Committee on un-American Activities
in its report March 29, 1944 ; also cited in the report of June 25, 1942.
The California Committee on un-American Activities, in its report,
1947, cited it as a Communist front, and it was cited as subversive and
un-American by the Special Committee of the House Committee on
Appropriations in its report of April 21, 1943.
Miss Kenyon. I do not think I need repeat my position.
Senator Tydings. We want to go along, if you will permit us, to,
for quite some time yet, but obviously there will be other members of
the committee who will want to ask you some questions, and I am won-
dering whether it would be convenient for you to stay over tonight
and come tomorrow to finish up.
Miss Kenyon. Could we possible finish tonight, Senator? I do
earn my bread and butter practicing law, and I have had several days
just knocked right out.
Senator Tydings. We will proceed, then.
Senator Hickenlooper, I believe you discussed the Neiw York
League of Women Shoppers, and your association with that. I have
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 201
uhat is alleged to be a photostatic copy of their letterhead of January
25. 11)40, in which you are listed, among others, as one of the sponsors.
Is that correct?
Miss Kexyon. No, that is absolutely not so, because I disagreed
violeniiv ^Yith them in about lUoO or 1937 and withdrew with a bang.
I remen'iber that very well indeed, so they probably just continued to
carry my name on the letterhead, which I am sorry to say many organ-
izations apj^ear to have done.
Senator HiCKEXLooPEr.. Did you withdraw in writing?
Miss Kexyon. I think I prcbably did. 1 know I had a great row
with them. I could find nothing in my files, but I don't keep files
forever and ever.
Senator Hickenlooper. At about what time did you withdraw from
that organization?
Miss Kenyox. That was 1937, I think — maybe it was earlier than
that. No. I think it was founded about 1935, and I think it was 1936
or li»37 when 1 withdrew as a sponsor. I Avas never a member.
I didn't approve of the way they handled things, and I told them so.
Senator Hickenlooper. 1 lien their use of your name on their letter-
head as late as January 25, 1940, was completely without your consent
and unauthorized?
Miss Kenyon. That's right.
Senator Hickexlooper. This organization was listed in 1944 by the
Special Committee on Un-American Activities as a Communist-con-
trolled front by indisputable documentary evidence obtained from the
files of the Communist Party in Philadelphia, according to the cita-
tion, and it was cited by the California Committee on Un-American
Activities in 1943 as one of the Communist-inspired and therefore
Communist-dominated and controlled consumer organizations.
Miss Kexyon^. That was my undei-standing, too, and that is one of
the reasons I withdrew from it.
Senator Hickexlooper. I merely wanted to get these things com-
pletely cleared up for the record.
I have a photostat of a letterhead of the Milk Consumers Protective
Committee, 215 Fourth Avenue, New York, New York. The date of
this is snpposed to be April 23, 1940, according to the photostat, and
under the heading ''advisory board'' is the name Dorothy Kenyon.
Do you recall the Milk Consumers Protective Committee?
Miss Kexyon. I covered that in my statement. I have absolutely
no i-ecol lection of any such thing, and I can find absolutely nothing in
my files.
Senator Hickexlooper. So that you cannot recall now whether or
not you ever were a member of it, or a member of the advisory board?
Miss Kexyox. That's right; that's right. It sounds so utterly
foreign to me that I would say I could not possibly have been, but
you do sometimes have a lapse of memory, especially about unimpor-
lant things.
Senator Hickexlooper. I think it is very apparent that a number
of these organizations have been free with your name. Judge Kenyon.
They have taken rather unusual liberties.
Miss Kexyon. I think so too. Senator. It is unfortunate to be a
liberal and a fighter for causes. It is probably better not to belong
to anvthing.
202 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVEISTIGATION
Senator Hickenlooper. Do vou recall the organization called the
Associated Blind, Inc.?
Miss Kenyon. This is conipletel}^ new.
Senator Hickenioopek. Anion o; the list of sponsors on this letter-
head is "Honorable Dorothy Ken3'on, Justice." I am merely asking
you about the organization.
Miss Kenyon. This, of course, is completely new, and I remember
absolutely nothing about it. I don't know anything about it at all.
Senator Hickenlooper. You have no recollection of the organiza-
tion ?
Miss Kenyon. No. I would say I had never heard of it.
Senator Hickenlooper. Is that the fact, that you have never heard
of it, so far as you remember?
Miss Kenyon. That is right, yes. I haven't any recollection what-
soever of such a name.
Senator Hickenlooper. Therefore the inclusion of your name as a
sponsor of that organization would have been without your authority
or consent ?
Miss Kenyon. I would say so ; I would say so.
Senator Hickenlooper. This organization is cited as a Communist-
front organization by the Special C'ouDnittee on Un-American Ac-
tivities in December 1944.
I have a photostat of an alleged program of the American Eussian
Institute, or I should say it ap])ears to be an invitation to a dinner
given by tlie American laissian Instiiute, a dinner and presentation
of its first annual award to Franklin D. Eoosevelt for outstanding
service in furthering American-Soviet relations, given on Tuesday,
May 7, 1946, at 6 : -)(> o'clock in the grand ballroom of the Hotel Penn-
sylvania, in New York. On the list of sponsors — a partial list, it
says — appears the name "Dorothy Kenyon." Do you recall that
dinner of that organization?
Miss Kenyon. I also covered that in my remarks. I do not recall
the dinner, but I did say that, being a Rooseveltian, a devoted Roose-
veltian, it might not have been strange if I had sponsored such a
dinner in his honor.
Senator Hickenlooper. The American Russian Institute for Cul-
tural Relations With the Soviet Union w^as cited by the California
Committee on Un-American Activities in its report in 1948.
Miss Kenyon. Are you talking about the same organization. Sen-
ator, or is this another one ?
Senator Hickenlooper. It says "American Russian Institute for
Cultural Relations With the Soviet Union." Perhaps I had better
look it up in the citations.
Senator Tydings. AVhile Senator Hickenlooper is looking that up,
do some of these organizations have a parent body wnth branches in
the various States, some of those that have been enumerated, like the
Maryland Division or the California Division, or is there one organ-
ization that covers the country with a mantle? Do they have State
chapters?
Miss Kenyon. Of what ?
Senator Tydings. Any of these organizations.
Miss Kenyon. Do you mean, do I know ?
Senator Tydings. Do you know ?
Miss Kenyon. No.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 203
Senator Tydings. The reason I asked yon is that there was put
in evidence yesterday in one of the cases an exhibit where they had
a Maryhmd chapter, and I was woiuUn-inir Avhether or not tliey had
chapters over the country in otlier States, because — and I don't say
this is a fact, but I think it is a U)<>ical inference — one of the chapters
nii<rht have a connotation that the ])arent body might not have, and
vice versa, for that matter, so I tliink that when Ave go into the State
fiiulinas on any of them we ought to know whether there are State
chapters there. We (h)n't know exactly what is being referred to.
Miss Kenyox. Unfortunately 1 know so little about these organiza-
tions that have been mentioned that I am not the authority to tell you
what their organization is.
.^"enator 1Ii(!vt,xi.( oper. Of course, the oidv reason these orfjaniza-
lions ai-e brought up is that your name appears on all of them as a
sponsor or adviser or something of that kind, and I merely wanted
!o })robe that situation a little.
Aliss Kexyox. That's right.
Senator Hickenlooper. 1 think perhaps I should not press this for
tlie moment, because this program says "The American Russian Insti-
tute cordially invites," et cetera, and the citation refers to the or-
ganization "American Russian Institute for Cultural Relations With
the Soviet Union.'' That is the citation of its Communist activities.
There is some addition to the name as contained in the program. It
may not be the same, and I shall therefore pass it up.
The organization known as "Descendants of the American Revolu-
tion" — are you familiar with that?
Miss Kexyox. Yes. That is not on this list. I have, however, a
inemory of that which is very clear, because that, again, Avas one of
the organizations that I neA-er Avould become a member of. I Avas
associated Avith them at the start and I didn't like them, and I just
droj^jied them as fast as I could.
The idea Avas a A^ery nice idea, and I think it Avas Helen Hall, of
XeAv York, Avho told me that some Quaker lady Avliose name I forgot
liad thought up the idea of having some Descendants of the American
Revolution avIio might have a slightly diti'erent program from that of
the I). A. R. It sounded to me like an interesting idea. Dr. John
Haynes Holmes, as I recall, was interested and Avas an adviser, and
also, if I recall, Mary Simkhovitch, the very fine Avoman in NeAv York
Avho Avas for long the head of Greenwich House. We explored the
itlea. and I may haAe been on that advisory committee for a little
while, but A^ery soon I saAv a little bit of some other people Avho
were Avorking in it and, as I say, I didn't like them at all and I got
out as delicately but as fast as I could. That Avas all back in the
early, or the middle of the lOoO's, I would have said. I remember
the idea intrigued me, but I did not like the people Avho were trying
to j)ut it into effect. They struggled to get me to join.
Senator Hickexlooper. The photostat AA'hich I liaA'e lists "Dorotliy
Kenyon, prominent attorney" as a member of the advisory board.
Miss Kexyox. As I say, I may have been on the advisory board for
a year, along Avith John Haynes Holmes and Mary Simkriovitch, but
1 got out very fast. What is'the date on that 'i
Senator Hickexlooper. There is no date that I notice.
204 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY IINVEISTIGATION
Miss Kenyon. It was the middle 1930's, I tliinlv. Oh, yes, they
are both on there. Isn't that wonderful ! My memory was good.
That idea did interest me.
Senator Hickenlooper. And that was when, did you sa}^ ?
Miss Kenyon. It was around the middle 1930's, I would have said.
I am not too clear about that. As I say, I haven't had a chance to
look it up. I do have the recollection.
Senator Hickenlooper. Your memory is good about that organiza-
tion in the 1930's?
Miss Kenyon. Yes, I i-emember that very much, because 1 was
really interested in that idea. Most of these others I know nothing
about because I had nothing to do with them.
Senator Higkenloopicr. The Descendants of the American Revolu-
tion are described by the Special Committee on Un-American Activi-
ties in its report of June 1942, as —
A Communist-front organization set up as a radical imitation of the Daughters
of tlie American Revolution. The Descendants have uniformly adhered to the
line of the Communist Party.
It was cited as a Communist front by the California Committee on
ITn- American Activities in its report in 1948 ; cited as "subversive and
un-American" by the Special Subconnnittee of the House Committee
on Appropriations in its report of April 21, 1943.
Miss Kenyon. My feeling was sound. I might say that quite a
number of my ancestors fought in the Revolutionary War — on the
right side.
Senator Hickenlooper. In the New York Journal-American of
Sunday, March 12, 1950, under a story with a byline by Howard
Rushmore, you are quoted — and I shall show you the entire story
Miss Kenyon. Yes; thank you very much.
Senator Hickenlooper. As saying, "Perhaps I was a sucker," when
letterheads listed your name nmong the sponsors of Communist-front
organizations dating from 1935 until 1949 and, "Denied in many in-
stances that the use of her name had been authorized on stationery
of organizations listed as Communist by Congress or the Attorney
General." and, "Declared McCarthy w^as attempting 'to make people
afraid of supporting popular ideas.' "
I wonder if that statement that "Perhaps I was a sucker" when
letterheads listed her name among sponsors of the Communist organ-
izations is an accurate statement.
Miss Kenyon. I may have said that perhaps in certain instances
I was a sucker, as who has not been, and I remember LaGuardia'i's
statement that when he made a mistake, it was a "beaut," and I may
have made one or two of those myself. When I have made a mis-
take, however, I think it has always been from generous motives, and
never because of selfish political motivations.
Senator Hickenlooper. Do you have a copy of this?
Miss Kenyon. I have it right here. My counsel did not let me
read it until this moment.
Senator Hickenlooper. You are welcome to look at this, but if
you have a copy of it we might as well keep this file together.
I have here a news story. Judge Kenyon, taken from the Times
Record of Troy, N. Y., Tuesday evening, January 17, 1950, headed
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 205
"Hiss trial seen example of civil liberties hysteria"; subheading
"Dorothy Kenyon, former judge, speaks at annual YAVCA dinner."
The story is as follows, and is under date of January 17, 1950 :
The current perjury trial of Alger Hiss was cited last night by former New
York City Municipal Court Judge I)orothy Kenyon as "a perfect example of a
sacrifice to the hysteria created by the Congressional Committee on Un-American
Activities." Speaking before a large gathering at a membership dinner at the
Troy VWCA, Judge Kenyon claimed. "Lawyers agree tliat tliere is not one shred
of respectable evidence to prove that Hiss did what he is charged with doing."
She added that in spite of this, Mr. Hiss "will be lucky if he can get a hung jury
in his second trial."
Now, for the })urpose of my question. Judge, I do not intend to read
any more of tliis. I expect to offer the entire story in evidence, and
you uuiy read it all if 3^ou want to, in evidence or anything else. But
for the purpose of my question I will ask you, is that a substantially
accurate statement of what you said in that speech?
Miss Kenyon. There is one sentence in there which is not correct,
where I am quoted as saying that lawyers agreed there was no evi-
dence — did3^ousay?
Senator HiCKKXLoorER. I shall read the quotation again, and I Avill
be glad to hand you the story.
Miss Kexyon. Thank you very much.
Senator Hickenlooper. The quotation here is as follows :
Judge Kenyon claimed "lawyers agree there is not one shred of respectable
evidence to prove tliat Hiss did what he is charged with doing." She added that
in spite of this Mr. Hiss "will be lucky if he can get a hung jury in his second
trial."
^fy question is as to the accuracy of the alleged quotation, which is
alleged in the story to be a direct quote from your statement. I have no
objection — in fact, it is perfectly all right with me if the whole stor}^
goes in the record.
Senator Tydings. Either way you want it.
Miss Kenyon. It makes no diflference to me, because I said every-
thing except that one thing, as I recall it.
Senator Hickenlooper. It will be put in the record.
Miss Kenyon. May I make a conmient in respect to that?
Senator Tydings. You. may.
Miss Kenyon. I made the remark quoted in substantially those
words, that it was a product of the hysteria created by the Congres-
sional Committee on Un-American Activities. I was asked in the
question pei'iod about the Hiss case, which many people have said too
many things about already, and if I can very briefly summarize what
I said about it, it was this : I did say that he would be lucky if he got
a second hung jury. I also said, which is not here, that in the present
condition of hysteria in tlie country it was almost impossible, it seemed
to me, to find a jury who had not perhaps already gotten some percon-
ceived idea of tlie issues, and tlierefore would be disqualified by having
made up their minds in advance, and that I really thought it Avould be
almost impossible to get what you would call a fair trial with a jury
completely objective for at least 2 years in the present temper of the
country.
In regard to this matter of evidence, what I said, in substance, was
that there wasn't a shred of direct evidence except what Mr. Whittaker
Chambers had said, plus the documents which also went back to Mv.
c
in
206 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY IX^•E1STIGATI0N
Chambers, because he had produced them. In fact, I think that is
louohly what I said. There ^Yas some discussion of the whole subject
on the part of the audience and myself. I think that there are a num-
ber of lawyers who ao-ree with that position.
I do not know Mv. Hiss or Mr. Chambers or any of the parties
involved. .
Senator Tydings. The exhibit will be printed m the record.
[From Troy (N. T.) Times Record, January 17, 1950]
Hiss Trial Seen Example of Civil Liberty IIvsteei a— Dcrotht Kenyon,
Former Judge. Speaks at Annx'al YWCA Dinner
The Piirrent perjiirv trial of Alser Hiss was cited last night by former New
York City MnnieipalVourt .Indue Dorothy Kenyon as "a perfect example of a
sacrifice to the hysteria created by the Congressional Committee on Un-American
Speaking before a large gathering at a membership dinner at tlie Troy YWCA,
.Judge Kenvon claimed "lawyers agree there is not one shred of respectable, evi-
dence to prove that Hiss did what he is charged with doing." She added that
in spite of this Mr. Hiss "will be^ lucky if he can get a hung jury in his second
trial "
Tlie case of the former State Department official came up during .Judge
Ivenvon's discussion on the status of civil liberties in the United States and in
the 'world She charged that '•under J. Parnell Thomas (former Republican
Representative from New .Jersey) the House Un-American Activities Committee
made accusations l)ased on the flimsiest hearsay."
The loyalty tests of Federal emv)b'yees, the Feinberg law, and wire tapping also
ame in for criticism from Judge Kenyon, a practicing attorney, who is now serv-
o- on the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women.
She declared that the Federal loyalty tests "contain no elements of a fair
trial" and pointed out that the accused employees "do not even know the nature
of the charges which are brought against them."
Characterizing the Feinberg law, wniich was recently declared unconstitutional,
as an -invitation to tattle on teacher," Judge Kenyon called it a violation of
academic freed<.m. She expressed the hope that the law "which is certain to
be drawn up to replace it" (the Feinberg law) will be drafted with more caution
Judtte Kenvon told the gathering that "the people of the United States will
soon he presented with a United Nations covenant on human rights which will
include a mechanism for enforcement." She said that Americans must decide if
they are willing to guarantee these rights and submit our violations of them
""The examp*ie\'he United States sets in the world will decide whether
the democratic ideal will stand or fall," she asserted.
"If we are going to win the battle of ideas we have to put into practice our
ideals of civil liberties," Judge Ivenyon said, concluding with a plea for America
to "get over the hysteria and end the witch hunting." „ , , . t ,• rr
Judge Kenvon was introduced by Mrs. Margaret Spencer, Rabbi Julius^ li.
Gutmann of the Third Street Temple led the devotional services, and Mrs. Gor-
man R. Clarke, executive director of the Troy YWCA, gave the invocation.
The program was under the direction of Mrs. Sterling P. Olmsted of the public
affairs committee.
Senator Hickenlooper. Just as a matter of interest in your phi-
losophy, which you have referred to in the past, Judge, I believe you
graduated from what schools?
]Miss Kexyon. Smith College.
Senator Hickenlooper. That was in 1908 ? ^^ . . ^
Miss Kenyon. Yes, that's right; and New York University l^aw
School. Harvard was not open then to women, otherwise I would
have done what my brothers did, _ i • i? 4^1
Senator Hickenlooper. Do you recall writing something tor tli*^
Decennial Class Book of 1918?
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY IXVESTIGATION 207
Miss Kfxyox. 10 is ? 1 am afraid. Senator, you have tlie advantage
of nie. 1 haven't the faintest idea of what folly I may have connnit-
ted at that point. , , , ^ n i
Senator TydixCxS. I don't think you would have been old enou<>li
to write in 1018. ^ ^ v i ^
Miss Kenyon. Very sweet of you, but I was. I hope you did not
mean mature. • -j. n
Senator HickkxL(M)i>er. T am just wondering if you recall.
Miss Kexyox. 1 don't recall one thing about it.
Senator Hickexlooper. Before I have even read it?
Miss Kexyon. I don't recall one thing.
Senator Hickexlooper. It is interesting, lou might desire to
check it. It goes to the question of your philosophy. I am told, in
the DecennialChiss Book of 1918, in writing about yourself, you used
these words: "Absolutelv not a Republican, nor a Prohibitionist.
She can't altoo-ether agree with the Democrats, nor can she quite com-
mit herself to Socialists, toward whom perhaps she most inclines.
Six years of nothing at all, of polite visits, existence and travel. How
it reads like the davs before the Russian Revolution. Here comes
a change, and with "about as little ceremony, enter the radical, the
woman economicallv indei)endent, the wage earner, the advocate of
international democracy. Having once started on the downward path,
nothing but disillusion is apparently likely to gtop me."
Do you recall writino; any such sentiments a^ that?
Miss Kexyox. I don't even know what it means. Do you ? I un-
derstand that part about Prohibition and Republicans, but nothing
else.
Senator Hickexlooper. I confess to some confusion, and 1 thought
perhaps you might be able to explain it.
Miss Kenyon. I am afraid I thought I was funny.
Thank vou very much for calling it to my attention.
Senator Hickexlooper. I thought sometimes those historical things
are interesting to go back and review.
Miss Kexyox. My class was also antisuft'rage if I remember aright.
Senator HiCKEXLt)0PER. The question involved, so far as I am con-
eerned— I assure you that I haven't the least evidence, nor do I have
any belief, that you are subversive in any way.
Miss Kenyox. Thank you very much. Senator.
Senator Hickexlooper. Or disloyal. I haven't approached that
from that standpoint at all. Regardless of what other members of
the committee may interpret as the statement Senator McCarthy made,
I interpret the statement he made as suggesting that your membership
or alleged membership in a great many organizations at least later
or presently declared to be subversive is a matter for concern so
far as the security risk goes in public service, especially in the State
Department and its activities.
Senator McMahox. Will the Senator yield at that point? I just
wanted to quote from the record as to what the Senator did charge the
witness with.
Miss Kexyox. I have it here, and it was a little more than member-
ship.
Senator McMahox" (reading) :
I think it is important that the committee know that the Communist activities
of Miss Kenyon are not (jnly deep rooted but extend back through the years. Her
208 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVEISTIGATION
sponsorship of the doctrines and pliilosophy of this ruthless and godless organi-
zation is not new.
Miss Kenton. Thank yon very much, Senator, and he also at one
point, on page 168, said :
Here again we have this prominent State Department official, Judge Kenyon,
crying aloud in her anguish for a fellow Red —
and he adds —
I call anyone who gets $12,000 a year of the people's money very prominent —
but of course I didn't get it —
a fellow red.
I consider that I have the right to assume that I was charged with
being a Communist, and therefore disloyal, and I don't want to get
angry. I have tried very hard not to.
Senator Hickenlooper. I assure you that I am not taking the posi-
tion that you are a Communist, so far as my views of the matter are
concerned, but I would like to ask you whether or not you are familiar
with Secretary Acheson's criteria on security risks as he has laid
them down before committees of Congress and, I understand, pub-
lished tliem.
Miss Ivenyon. No.
Senator Hickenlooper. Are you familiar with that?
Miss Kenyon. No, I don't believe I know them.
Senator Hickenlooper. Assuming that he has laid down the cri-
teria, among others, that membership in organizations that have been
declared to be subversive by official bodies is a matter for serious
question and examination of the person as* a security risk before
public employment is given them — I say assuming that; if I am in-
correct in that statement I can be corrected — before you took public ,
employment as a representative of this country on the United Nations,
did any official discuss with you the allegations of your membership
in organizations that had been declared to be subversive?
Miss Kenyon. Never. They have come and talked to me about other
people.
Senator Hickenlooper. In the event, and this is a hypothetical sit-
uation, a supposition that I am making, the files in connection with in-
formation on your activities disclose, prior to tlie time of your em-
ployment or representation of this country, allegations of member-
ships in a substantial number of organizations that had been declared
to be subversive by various public bodies, such as the Attorney General,
the House Un-American Activities Committee, or other organizations
of that sort, what is your personal opinion as to whether or not j^ou
should have been interviewed along that line?
I am assinning, for the purpose of this question, and making no al-
legation one way or the other, that there were repeated allegations in
your file of membership in organizations that had been declared sub-
versive. Do you think that you should have been talked to about this
matter for some explanation or inquiry as to liow your name hap-
peiied to appear on these lists as sponsor and otherwise?
Miss Kenyon. Well, Senator, I appreciate your asking me my
o]:)inion as to how the State Department shoidd have handled this and
other cases of dangerous persons. I would thinlc, myself, in the first
place, of the organizations that have been named here, membership in
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 209
them is practically not cliar<i;ed to me at all. I have been charfred
Avith sponsoring a number of organizations, some of which I am i)er-
fectly certain I never did sponsor. The ones that I think I did boiled
down to a handful that were probably at the time I belonged not Com-
riumist at all, because I am sure you know about the infiltration of
Connnunists into various organizations, and I would have thought
that it would have been i)roi)er for the State Department, or any other
governmental body, in considering taking someone on their staff, or
whatever that they should look at their record in the round, and look
at all their activities, and not just at a tiny little bit of a group, and
I have recited a number of my acti"vnties here today. There are many
others, during most of my life, which I have not troubled the com-
mittee with going into, because I did not want to take your time or
bore you. I therefore simply hit the high spots of the things which
were inconsistent with the so-called Communist line, and if you were
to look into all my activities, I think you might think yourself, with-
out further questioning of me, that I was a good security risk.
Senator Hickexlooper. Judge Kenyon, the question I asked you
Miss Kexyox. I am sure I have been looked into b}^ everything.
Senator Hickexlooper. The question that I asked you — perhaps I
didn't make it clear, and I merely asked for your opinion.
Miss Kexton. Yes; I understand.
Senator Hickexlooper. In the light of the criteria laid down by
the Secretary of State himself, in whicfi he said that membership in
organizations which had been declared to be subversive, or which were
declared to be subversive by official bodies, was at least a cause for
serious examination of the background and security risk potential of
the individual who is considered for public office. In that light of
those criteria, and then assuming for the sake of this question that
in your files there appeared numerous cases where you were alleged
to have been a sponsor or a member of a number of organizations,
whether it is 20 or 25 or whatever number, but a substantial num-
ber
Miss Kextox. It boils down nearer to six or eight.
Senator Hickexlooper. I am talking about the allegation. I am
not talking about your actual membership. I am talking about the
allegations that you were a member of a substantial number of these
organizations. Wouldn't you tliink that in keeping with the criteria
laid down for examination someone officially should have talked to
you about this matter? Shouldn't it liave raised some question?
Shouldn't they have said, "We will go and see Judge Kenyon. We will
give her an opportunity to tell us about these things."
Here are these allegations. Wouldn't you think that would be a
perfectly normal thing in carrying out the investigating procedure
before appointment as a public official ?
Miss Kextox. It might have been done. Senator. I have no doubt
that very serious consideration was given to my text, but what is gained
by talking to a person and asking them whether they are subversive
or are in favor of overthrowing the Government by force and vio-
lence, when you know perfectly well the answer that you will get
does not seem to me very substantial? I think the things which they
doubtless did do were to talk to people with whom I had been asso-
ciated in various activities, and to get their views on me, which was
210 STATE DEPARTME]S^T EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVEISTIGATION
considerably more intelligent than to come and talk to me. What
do yon think I wonld have said ?
Senator Hickenlooper, I would have said some of the things I have
been saying to you today.
Senator Hickenlooper. I am minded to ask the question, Judge
Kenyon
Miss Kenton. It is the only way I can answer it.
Senator Hickenlooper. Because you so vigorously and so very prop-
erly and so quickly demanded to be heard in this case, when the charges
were made by Senator McCarthy, and I would think that normally
it would therefore be your reaction that of course the State Depart-
ment shoidd have come to you and let you jn-esent your case in this
matter if these things appeared in the file. It would seem to me to
be perfectly consistent.
Miss Kenyon. I understand you now. Senator, and I would say
this. You are now, instead of asking me whether I think this was
something the State Dej)artment should have done, talking about it
in terms of what I would have liked in respect to my own reputation.
Senator Hickenlooper. I am asking you for your judgment. You
are a very able woman, a woman of experience; you are a jurist.
Your opinion, I think, is valuable.
Miss Kenyon. I would have been very happy had they come and
had I been able to answer and to tell them that most of these things
I had had nothing whatsoever to do wnth. I didn't know at the
time that there was a case like this building up against me.
Senator Hickenlooper. Don't you think it was a matter
Miss Kenyon. I have learned a lot lately.
Senator Hickenlooper. That you miglit well have known about,
that they should have talked to you about and told you about?
Miss Kenyon. I would have liked it had they come to me; yes,
indeed. I would have been delighted, and I would have given them
another piece of my mind.
Senator Hickenlooper. With the reservation, Mr. Chairman, that
I still feel and insist that, inasmuch as this is one of the cases involved
in this matter, the investigative file must be available to this com-
mittee and that I don't consider this to be any kind of a complete
ciuestioning of the witness without the background of those files, I
have nothing more to say at this time.
Senator Tydings. Judge, I would like to ask you one or two ques-
tions.
Have you ever been an employee of the State Department?
Miss Kenyon. My answer would be that I don't think so. I am
not sure what you call a United States delegate to the United Nations.
I had always described myself as a piece w^orker — p-i-e-c-e worker —
for the State Department. I do not think that that position is con-
sidered an employee. I am not sure. Senator. You are asking me a
technical question. That is my only connection ever with the State
Department.
Senator Tydings. The-r.ext question I would like to ask you is. What
was your first notice of the charges that Senator McCarthy had
brought here concerning you?
Miss Kenyon. Wednesday.
Senator Tydings. In the newspapers?
STATE DEPAKTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 211
Miss Kknydx. At 1-2 o'clock ;i reporter called nie up, and from then
until 1 a. ni. reporters called nie up.
Senator Tydings. Did you have any notice that your name was
ooinir to he called into question before this connnittee before the re-
jiorter called you up ^
Miss Kknyox. I never had the faintest inkling. I was horribly
busy. I had })rofessional engaoements all last week and this and next
week; and tomorrow is income-tax day. and I do some income-tax
woi-k; and 1 was submerged witli things and never once thought about
Congress.
Senator Tynixiis. Thei'e has been no evidence here that anyone who
has made any charge against you has actually seen the files in the
State DeiKirtment, so you, in answering these charges, are in the same
position so far as the connnittee knows as was the witness who brought
the original charges. They were brought, so far as we know, without
any seeing of the State Department files themselves, and consequently
you are here without us having seen the State Department files.
Miss Ken YON. We are all in the same boat.
Senator Tydixgs. I would like to ask 3'on this : When you joined
an}- of these organizations, those that you have particularly identified
yourself with and have given your reason for joining, how did you
come to join them ? Did you organize these things, or were you in-
vited by someone you knew to join ?
Miss Kenyox'. I was always invited. I have always been very busy
with my law practice and then, of course, with my governmental work
during those years of the thirties. Perhaps Government work isn't
quite as trying as practicing law. I seem to have had a little more
time in the late thirties when I was a Government official for extra-
curricular activities, and perhaps that is a pity. But in any event, you
know, I got around, I spoke, and then I have always cared very much,
as I stated, for the under dog; and the American Civil Liberties Union,
of course, has dealt with under dogs ; so people came to me and told me
about projects.
Senator Tydixgs. What character of people suggested that you join
any of these organizations?
Miss KKX'Yt)X. Well, they were just people that I knew.
Senator Tydings. Were they prominent i)eo])le in the community oi
well-known "i-eiiutation, or were they ]:)eo))le that were of shady re))u
tation. or Conununists. or pro-Connnunists. so far as you know, look-
ing back on this record?
Miss Kenyox. I would have said, for the most part, many of them
were friends of mine who do have re])utations, but I also know a lot
of little peo])le who don't have reputations in that sense of the word,
and some of these little groups that have been talked about I surmise
were perhajis in the beginning just a group of little peo])le in some
neighborhood in Xew Yoi-k who had heard me speak and told me
about their idea, and would I hel]) them — nuiybe wovdd I go on the
advisory connnittee while they were trying to organize this tiling, be-
cause I don't entirely deal in the world of Park Avenue and Wall
Street.
Senator Tydings. I did not mean in the economic sense. I meant
in the citizenship sense. Were any of these peo]de who invited you
to join, so far as you knew them, or so far as you know now, members
212 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVEISTIGATIOK
of the Communist Party, or allied with the Communist Party, or
identified with Communist movements per se ?
Miss Kenyon. At the time when they came to me, I had no idea
that they were Communists, if they were. I have had no idea whatso-
ever in respect to it. As I grew a little older in the thirties I worked
out a policy that I was cooperative and friendly toward most people,
but in respect to Communists, while I would support their civil liber-
ties, my policy was isolationism, and I kept away from them and tried
to keep them away from me. .
Senator Tydings. I have lots of other questions, but I am going to
defer to my two commiteeemen so you may not stay here if we can get
through. Senator Green ? • • i i.
Senator Green. Miss Kenyon, you have many times m reply to a
question referred to your filing system and having found nothing m
your files. I think perhaps it would be just as well for you to say a
few words as to what this filing system was. Was it your habit to
open a file for a new organization you joined, and things like that^
Miss Kenyon. Yes, Senator. I would be very glad to answer that
question. It sounds a little formidah.le to call it a filing system; but,
of course, you know I have my law office ; and we, of course, have my
legal files ; and I have file clerks.
When it has come to the question of these nonlegal matters, but
extracurricular activities, so to speak, my organizational matters,
mv various secretaries from time to time have tried to get order in
them and I have a file of associations. Wliere I have a great deal
to do'with them, the files with respect to them become very voluminous,
and then I have miscellaneous association files. Wlien there are spe-
cific things which become important enough to have a file by them-
selves, they get a file; and then, as 1 say, in the ''miscellaneous comes
in what I would call the cats and dogs, the things that maybe I have
iust contact with for a very short period of time.
I did not. Senator, keep— unfortunately, if I did, I would have to
pay much more rent than I do now— and I cannot keep, all my files
from the beo-inning of time, because every now and then we burst at
the seams and I either have to throw out some old ones or buy some
new filing cabinets or do both, and my office in New York is not a very
bio- one. It is jammed with files. Every now and then we have to
ha'^ve a house cleaning, and out go a lot of little innocent lambs.
I had a file on this Political 1 'ail Fund thing. We had a card tor
it But it ended, you see, in 1934 or 1935, and there wasn t any file.
We had thrown it out. So I was stuck. All I could do was to ask
Roger Baldwin. „
Senator Green. As a rule you have a file of one kind or other tor
any organization of which you are actively a member ?
Miss Kenyon. That's right, and we have cards for them.
Senator Green. And, when you say you haven't found any refer-
ence to it, you infer that in all probability it was ]ust a passing
interest or some minor activity like a speech or something of that
Miss Kenyon. That is precisely it. I also have a speech file, but it
does not go back to the thirties.
Senator Green. My distinguished colleague asked you about a good
many associations and organizations on which your name appeared
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 213
in some publication, such as an invitation to a dinner or something
like that, and it was based on the theory of guilt by association.
Miss Kenyon. Yes.
Senator (tkeex. Because that is tlie only purpose it seems to me it
could have, and he quoted the Secretary of State as referring to that
as one of the criteria which might be used in determining an applicant
or an employee's loyalty, although the Secretary of State used that
only as one of a number
Miss Kenyox. a number of criteria?
Senator Green. Yes ; that the thought should be applied.
I think it would be just as well, or I would be glad, at any rate, to
liear your views on this theory of guilt by association. It always
seemed to me as though that was one of the fundamental differences
between the totalitarian and the democratic form of government.
Senator Hickexlooper. Mr. Chairman, so long as the Senator has
predicated his question on his assumption of what I said, may I clear
it up?
Senator Greex. I will be glad to have you do so.
Senator Hickexlooper. I did not say the Secretary of State had
set these up as criteria of loyalty. I used the term ''security risk."
There is a vast difference between security risk and either proof of
or allegation of disloyalty. There is a vast difference between them.
A bad security risk may be loyal intentionally.
Senator Green. I am glad the Senator understands the difference,
because the resolution under which we are. acting specifies disloyalty
and not security risk, so I assumed that those who are charged in these
hearings and before this committee were being charged with dis-
loyalty. It seems to me it is a logical conclusion.
However, about this theory of guilt by association, I know you must
have very definite ideas, and I will be glad to hear them.
Miss Kexyox'. Thank you, Senator. I want to be very brief.
Of course, guilt hy association alone seems to me a violation of due
process, whicli is in our Constitution as one of the civil liberties which
I have fought for. The associations themselves, the organizations
themselves — and I hold no brief for any of these; I am prepared to
believe they are all devilish — nevertheless they themselves have never
been found subversive by a court of law or by any process other than
an administrative edict; and administrative edicts or fiats or what-
ever you call them sound to me like Mr. Hitler and Mr. Stalin; there-
fore, I think that the terming of an organization subversive is in itself
a violation of civil liberty.
And then from that to jump to the fact that a person who is a spon-
sor or a member or participates in one tiny little project for a short
])eriod of time is therefore tarred with the same brush and is there-
fore himself or herself subversive seems to me a non-sequitur. Very
frequently it just is not true.
Therefore it seems to me that due process is violated, and maybe it
js a bill of attainder and maybe it is an ex post facto law. I am pre-
pared to say that it is completely contradictory to the democratic
process.
Senator Green. I thought that was your view, and I am glad to hear
you state it so clearly.
Miss Kexyox. I hope vou read the New York Times editorial on
"The Right To Join."
214 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
><pn.ifor Green I did not. Perhaps this will be a good siibstitute
^efesjS one other question: You were furnished with a good
m.nv lis s on which appeared disreputable people as well as people
of he Idlhe t repute. I have before me a docmnent relatnig to you
whic^ cont^^ins people I do not think any of whom are disreputable,
all of the highest repute.
Miss Kenyon. Oh, Senator, thank you. „ .^ .^ i • n ^
Senatoi Green. And I think it would be well if it appeared m the
record now It is headed "For release upon completimi of testimony
by Judge Dorothy Kenyon before Subcommittee of Senate Foreign
Relations Committee, March 14, 1950.
I don^t know whether von care to read it and place it m the lecmci.
You are the only witness here; I suppose, unless you are overcome by
"m^^SycS'^S^^i-. vou embarrass me. Might my counsel read
it foi- me ^ If I know what it is, I would prefer not to read it myself.
Senator Tydings. Counsel will read the document.
Mr KiENDL. The document reads as follows :
The" following is a statement made public t.>day by New YorK Attorney C. C.
"^SiT:^ ::^ZS'^^^^^o^^eZ senator McCarthy, of Wis-
"^'^ ;^ bif teSumony before'tbe -^committee of tl^ Senate C^mnnt^e o
consm,
"t a public natuie. She lias attained a tigli ieimta(ii.n t<Ji bei abilitj aiitt bei
'■":\V'l'!rie,fr, ir'w'^SlSge'iS'sbe l,a, never bad tbe sligbtes, .y^^
states No citizen of New York is a more loyal American.
That is signed by : Ernest Angell C. C. ^^m;lingbam John W D^^^^^^^
T Invd Garrison Edward S. Greenbaum, ^lcholas Kelley, William H.
D^l^^il NeXld Morris, Robert Moses. Robert P. Patterson, A. J. G.
Priest, Whitney North Seymor, and Ordway lead.
Senator Green. Thank you.
Miss Kenyon. Thank you very much. Senator.
Senator Tydings. Senator McMahon ?
Senator McMahon. No questions.
Senator TvmNGS. Miss Kenyon, we are very much obliged to you
for coming down here and testifying. We will try and not call you
hack unless you get in the headlines again.
Miss Kenyon. Unless I get in hot water. ^„ fL^f
Senator TvmNos. I would like to announce before we^adjourn that
I would like to have an executive committee meeting of the subcom-
mittee in room G-23 in the Capitol tomorrow morning at 10 :.^0
o'clock I hope all members will be present. It is important that they
•ill l)e there promptly so we can dispatch some pending business.
(Whereupon, at 5 : 15 p. m., the hearing was recessed, to reconvene
upon the call of the Chair.)
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE
LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
MONDAY, MARCH 20, 1950
United States Senate,
Committee on Foreign Relations,
Subcommittee Appointed Under Senate Resolution 231,
Washington^ D. C.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to adjournment on March 14, 1950,
at 10 : 20 a. m. in room 318, Senate Office Building, Senator Millard
E. Tydings, chairman of the subcommittee, presiding.
Present: Senators Tydings, Green, McMahon, and Hickenlooper.
Also present : Senators Connally (chairman of the full committee),
Tobey, Wiley, and ]\[cCarthy.
Senator Tydings. The committee will please come to order.
Dr. Jessup, would you care to take the stand 1
Hold up your right hand, first.
Do you solemnly swear that the evidence you shall give in the pend-
ing matter before this committee, shall be the truth, the whole truth,
and nothing but the truth, so help you God ?
Ambassador Jessup. I do.
Senator Tydings. Take a seat, sir.
TESTIMONY OF HON. PHILIP C. JESSUP, AMBASSADOR AT LAPvGE
OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Senator Tydings. Dr. Jessup, you are familiar, I assume with why
this committee is sitting.
Ambassador Jessup. Yes, sir.
Senator Tydings. I likewise assume that you are familiar with the
statement made by Senator McCarthy concerning you, sometime ago,
during the process of these hearings ?
Ambassador Jessup. Yes, sir.
Senator Tydings. You have read it ?
Ambassador Jessup. Yes, sir.
Senator Tydings. Are you prepared to make an answer to that,
today ?
xVmbassador Jessup. I should like to do so, sir.
Senator Tydings. You may proceed in your own way.
Ambassador Jessup. Thank you. Senator.
Mr. Chairman, my name, as I think may be known, is Philip C.
Jessup. I reside in Norfolk, Conn., and my present position is Am-
bassador at Large of the United States.
Senator Tydings. Dr. Jessup, you might, for about a minute or two,
give us a little biography as to how long vou have been in the State
215
68970— 50— pt. 1 15
216 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY LNTESTIGATION
Department, and so forth, so that when you take up the record, those
of the people here who are not familiar with that, will have that in
mind. . -,1 • ^
Ambassador Jessup. I have included that ni my statement, with just
a little prefatory paragraph, if I may.
Senator Tydings. That is all right, sir.
Ambassador Jessup. I wanted to say, sir, that I greatly appreciate
the opportunity that your committee lias given me to appear before
you in connection with the charges and insinuations which have been
made against me by Senator McCarthy. On March 8 Senator Mc-
Carthy made the following statement to this committee which I quote
from pages 71 and 72 of the record :
Although I shall discuss the unusual affinity of Mr. Philip C. Jessup of the
State Department for Communist causes later in this inquiry, I think it pertinent
to note that this gentleman now formulating top-flight policy in the Far East
affecting half the civilized world was also a sponsor of the American-Russian
Institute.
That is the end of the quotation.
I^Ir. Chairman, no one can be loyal to communism and also loyal to
the Hnited States. This attack on me by Senator McCarthy is obvi-
ously intended to give the impression that I am disloyal to the United
States. When Senator McCarthy made that statement, I was m
Pakistan completing an official mission throughout the countries of
Asia. This mission was carried out as part of the effort this country
is making to strengthen the free and democratic forces in Asia and the
capacity "of free Asia to resist subversive or antidemocratic forces.
During the course of this mission it was my duty to speak on behalf
of the Government of the United States to the chiefs of state, prime
ministers, foreign ministers, and otlier high officials of almost all of
the countries of that area. In the course of that mission I also made
various public statements in an attempt to make clear to the peoples of
the east that the solution of their problems does not lie in the false
hopes dangled before them by the agents of Communist greed and
imperialism.
For example, at New Delhi, on February 23, 1950, 1 issued this state-
ment to the press, and I should like to read that extract:
Since the end of the Second World War, history has recorded the extension
of a new imperialism that has broutiht more than a dozen countries under the
domination of a sin£;le expanding power. The device used by this expanding
power in extending its imperialism is to hold out the glittering promises of
communism as a beacon light for the rescue of peoples who are suffering from
economic underdevelopment or who are trying to remove the shackles of the old
traditional kinds of colonialism. However, where communism gains control,
it becomes immediately apparent that the peoples are not allowed to determine
their own future, but must conform to a single policy laid down in Moscow.
* * * Communism is hostile to what the Asian people want to do and
what we want to help them to do— which is to develop the stability of their new
countries and to develop their resources and their technical skills so that they are
not subject to penetration, either through ignorance or distress or because they
succumb to the false promises of the Communists.
That is the end of the quotation from that statement I made at
New Delhi.
If Senator McCarthy's innuendoes were true, the representatives ot
the foreign governments with whom I spoke would be entitled to be-
lieve that mv statements to them were deceitful and fraudulent. They
would be entitled to b^^lieve that no confidence should be placed in the
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 217
declui-ations wliich I made on behalf of our Government. If it were
true that the President and tlie Secretary of State had sent on such a
mission a person who was a traitor to his own Government they might
well feel that they could place no confidence in the statements made
by any of the representatives of the United States abroad.
It may be relatively unimportant whether the character of a single
American citizen is blackened and his name is brought into disrepute,
but in the present serious situation of international relations through-
out the world today it is a question of the utmost gravity when an
official holding the rank of Ambassador at Large of the United States,
of America is held up before the eyes of the rest of the world as a liar
and traitor. I am aware, ]\Ir. Chainnan, that Senator McCarthy has
not used those words. But if his insinuations were true, these words,
would certainly be appropriate.
It is impossible for anyone to estimate the harmful effect that these
innuendoes have had on the success of my mission and the foreign
policy of the United States. It is clear that if these insinuations re-
main unanswered, they will further weaken the United States in its
conflict with world communism. For that reason I flew back from
Europe and asked this opportunity to be heard by this committee.
It is obvious that an individual holding the high position of Senator
of the United States would not venture in this way to undermine the
position of the United States in its relations with the rest of the
world unless there was some reason for doing so. I have tried to
figure out \\hat the reason behind this attack might be.
I suppose that if I chose to follow the tactics which you gentlemen
have witnessed in recent weeks, I would start with the hypothesis
that this action was Communist inspired. It so happens that, so far
as I know, the only other attack upon my integrity during the course
of my trip in Asia was made by the Peiping Communist organs, and
by Izvestia, the official publication of the Soviet Union in Moscow.
On March 3, Izvestia attacked me in the following manner:
At a press conference arranged on February 23 in Delhi, Jessup set out to
obtain a change of view in Indian public opinion. Jessup brought into action
all kinds of means: Flattery and the publicizing of American "assistance to
backward regions" and most of all, of course, slanderous fabrications against
the U. S. S. R. * * * In general, Jessup tried with all his might but he had
little success. < The imperialistic aggressive character of the policy of the
United States throughout the world, and in Asia in particular, is so evident
that no hypocritical speeches and anti-Communist phillipics could hide it.
Mr. (Chairman, I should like to place before the committee copies
of other Communist attacks upon me. I have them with me, and
would like to deliver them before you in a few- moments.
Senator Tydings. They will be inserted in the record at this point.
Exhibit 1 — Jessup
Attacks by Commlnist Press and Radio Upon Ambassadob Jessup
(1) Excerpt from an article in Jen Jlin Pao, Peiping newspaper, on January
10, 19.50.
(2) Excerpt and summary of article in Wen Hui Pao, Shanghai newspaper,
on January 11, 19,50.
Co) Excerpt from an editorial in Wen Hui Pao, Shanghai newspaper, on
January 12, 1950.
(4) Excerpts from an editorial in Chaunmin Pao, Communist newspaper, oa
January 2fi, 1950.
218 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY mVElSTIGATION
(5) Excerpts from an editorial in Seng Hwo Pao, Djakarta newspaper, on
January 31, 1950.
(6) Kadio Peking broadcast of February 13, 1950.
(7) Radio Moscow broadcast of February 13, 1950.
(8) Excerpts from an article in Izvestia on Marcb 3, 1950.
(9) Official translation of an article in Izvestia, March 3, 1950.
Excerpt From Jen Min Pao, Petping Paper, January 10, 1950, Concerning the
United States Occupation of Japan
[The excerpt is contained in an official plain language telegram to the Department of State
from Peiping]
INCOMING telegram
Department of State, Division of Communications and Records
Control 5359
Rec'd January 13, 1950, 10 : 45 p. m.
From: Peiping.
To : Secretary of State.
No. 101, January 13.
Sent Department 101, Shanghai 29, Tientsin.
Peiping Jen Min Jib Pao January 10 carried NCNA.
January 9 despatch re United States occupation Japan. Translation follows :
Administrator U. S. Far East aggressive policy and Ambassador at Large
Jessun arrived Tokyo January 5, held series secret meetings with MacArthur.
According own statement discussed Japanese Peace Treaty and other problems
including Taiwan question. According Tokyo UP January 8 despatch, observers
believe Jessup talked about question forming U. S.-Japanese alliance simul-
taneous conclusion separate peace treaty with Japan. This means under foim
U S -Japanese alliance U. S. will occupy Japan long-term basis make Japan
main U S base advancement aggression Far East. Concerning China Jessup
said "U S has not abandoned, not planning abandon China other Far East
countries U S. will continue oppose C. P. actions overthrowing existing gov-
ernments by violence." This means U. S. imperialism continuing to adopt
aggressive policy intervention China's domestic affairs and to be enemy people
China all Far East countries. End translation.
AGA : MW
Excerpt and Summary of Article in Wen Hui Pao, Shanghai Communist
Publication, on January 11, 1950, Criticizing Ambassador Jessup
FThe document which contains the excerpts and summary i^s an official plain language
telegram to the Department of State from Shanghai]
incoming telegram
Department of State — Division of Communications and Records
Control 4238
Rec'd January 12, 1950, 3 : 08 a. m.
From : Shanghai
To : Secretary of State
No. 176, January 12 . . j. ^ -^ \
Sent Department 176, repeated Peiping 42, Taipei 61 (Taipei repeat Hong Kong).
Press Review :
Wen Hui Pao January 11 carries following comment entitled "another devilish
scheme" : "Ambassador-at-large Jessup, executor of American aggressive policy
in Far East, is conducting series of secret meetings in Japan with MacArthur.
"What is secret? It is one known to all, a 'secret' filled with devilish designs
They are attempting to conclude unilaterally peace treaty with Japan, and at
same time 'American-Japanese alliance.' American imperialism intends to place
Japan under its perpetual enslavement, and use Japan as base for aggression
of Far East, principally China,
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 219
"Let us listen to droam-like babbling of Jessup. He says that U. S. has
not abandoned, and does not propose to abandon, China or other Far East coun-
tri(>s, and that U. S. will contimie to oppose acts of Comniunists in seeking over-
throw of existing governments with brntal force. Such is way Jessup slanders
overthrow by Chiiiese people of traitorous reactionary group."
I>ut Chinese people, too, have not abandoned, nor do they propose to abandon,
mission against imperialism, feudalism, and bureaucratic capitalism. Though
this mission has been basically consummated, China will continue to raise high
her vigilance, and continue to oppose and deal blows to imperialism attempts for
enslavement of Far East.
Excerpt Prom an Editorial in Wen Hui Pao, Shanghai Communist Paper,
January 12, lUoU, Concerning Ambassador Jessup's Trip to the Far East
[The excerpt is contained In an official plain language telegram to the Department of
State from Shanghai]
incoming telegram
Department of State — Division of Communications and Records
Control 5403.
Rec'd January 14, 1950, 1 : 33 a. m.
From : Shanghai
To : Secretary of State
No. 205, January 13
Sent Department 205, repeated Peiping 46, Hong Kong 23, Taipei 71', Tokyo 8.
Press review :
Wen Hui Pao, January 12, carries following editorial headed "Watch Ameri-
cans New Intrigue in Far Bast."
"Philip C. Jessup, American Ambassador at Large, Chief of American State
Department's Far East Policy Study Group, and responsible executor of Ameri-
can policy of aggression in Far East, arrived in Japan about week ago and has
, since been engaged in series of secret conferences with MacArthur, American
reactionai-y leader who now rules Japan.
"According to Jessup's open announcement and to information given out by
Americans' own news agency, problem of peace treaty with Japan together
with other problems related to Far East (including problem of Taiwan) con-
stitute object of these secret conferences.
"What is termed problem of peace treaty with Japan is nothing but attempt
by American imperialists to conclude unilateral peace treaty with Japan to
exclusion of Soviet Union and China, to lay foundation for future formulation
of 11 S.-Japanese alliance. In other words, America will use U. S.-Japanese
alliance to turn Japan into American base of aggression in Far East, and use
unilateral peace as means of carrying out prolonged occupation of Japan as well
as fostering Jajpanese reactionary.forces."
Translation of Editorial in Chinese Communist Newspaper Chuanmin
Pao of January 26, 1950, Enclosure to United States Foreign Service Des-
patch No. 162 of March 2, 1950, From John F. Stone, First Secretary of
Ebassy, Bangkok, Thailand
Period : January 20-30, 1950.
translations from CHINESE NEW^SPAPERS, AMB^SIcAN EMBASSY, BANGKOK
Chinese atgociations: Kir Pong Elected President of Taechiu Association
News Item January 20
CHUANMIN PAO (Commuuist)
Following is the result of- yesterday's elections of the Taechiu Association:
*Kir Pong, President and Member of Standing Committee; Sow Kung-kiam, Vice
President ; Tang Sang Hah, Treasurer ; Lee Ki-heong, Secretary ; Teng Boon-iang,
Ngow Jin-an, Rae Thian-ek, Members of Standing Committee. *Kir Pong at
present is in Hongkong (translator's note).
220 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
Sino-Thai relations: Peking Radio Attack on Thailand
Editorial January 25
KUANG HUA PAD (Tending to pro-Communist)
We Cliinese overseas are, of course, fully aware of the denials from the Thai
Pa dfamentarv Secretary to the Foreign Ministry, the Foreign Minister, Premier
S vrand the Piibl ci[y Department, following the UP report quoting Peking
So b?oadcSts conce/ning the Thai government's I'^J-f -!;. ^^^^^^^f^Thai
Sneaking conscientiously, since the very Ijeginnmg of Smo-Thai i elations inai
peopl' have very rarely gone to China but a great n/^mbev of Chinese hav^
mierated into this countrv, especially during recent years. Ihe Chinese have
Svoi^ to seek from Thailand, while the Thai have nothing to obtain f^oni China
Tlierefore the Thai authorities take no interest in Chinese problems, and chatter
freeU without fear because they assume they have support. Such "denials of
''5f^;p?obl^: ^c:^SS;s Chinese are to be solved, instead of laying bl^me
on others we should help ourselves first by stabilizing the pohtical com^^iion
so that the rich may invest their money at home and the poor may contribute
ther series to the nation. If overseas Chinese can change the heath and
Jhk-ket to prosperous cities in behalf of others, why not rebuild our own home
"\?^W.s is realized, there would be more Chinese going home than soing f road,
and such matters as a "protest" will be unnecessary since every Chinese over-
seas is pleased to go back to his motherland.
Imperialism: Bangkok Conference and "Pacific Pact"
Editorial January 26
CHUANMiN PAD (Comiuunist)
The U. S. imperialist Far East Diplomatic Conference has been scheduled to
onen from Februarv 13-17 in P.angkok. This important conference m which the
US imperials I^ir East aggressive plan is to be revised should not be over-
looked Jessup, head of this^conference, is one of the authors of the aggressive
Far East policy of the U. S. State Department. „ i „r./i
From the United States, he has been to Tokyo. Taiwan. Hongkong and
Manna DurJng a two-day stay in Taiwan, he had secret talks with the bandit
Oliian- • in Manila he did not quit until Quirino promised to accept the U. S.
fmSi-falist "pS'fom-" and to convert the Philippines into the "showroom
""^TherfrhrSf be no doubt of the purpose of the conference since Jessup has
to to r^-id for secret talks with rulers of various Far Eastern nations long be-
forltl^'conSrence takes place. For example, according to informed quarters
in ?h" Phil pp nes, Quirino not only gave assurance of his "cooperation" with
the united Sates in its defense plan, but also expressed his "welcoin^'to the
assurance from American officials that the U. S. will retain adequate forces in the
Fai East Whereas any nation in the Far 'East needs only to express wel-
c(mie" and give assurances of "cooperation" with American imperial sts foi what
they required, the deal surely is successful and mutually beneficial.
ExCFiiFT Feom an Editorial in Seng Hwo Pao, Chinese Communist Newspaper
IN Djakarta, January 31, 1950
[The excerpt is contained in au official communication to the Department of State from
*■ Djakarta, Indonesia]
Foreign Service of the United States of America
Priority : Air pouch.
956d.61/2-750
Security : Unclassified
To : Department of State
From : Djakarta 92 February 7, 1950
f: Voluntary .
Subject : Chinese newspaper editorial on Jessup Mission.
There is cited below an English translation of an editorial. A Few Words to
Jes^uirwiiidi appeared January 31, 1950, in the SENG HWO PAO, a Chinese
Communist newspaper published daily in Djakarta.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 221
A FEW WORDS TO JESSUP
The American Ainbassador-at-Large, Philip C. Jessiip. the day before yesterday
arrived in D.laliarta from Vietnam. He intends to stay here five days. He con-
ferred with Hatta. The sub.iect of discussion was kept a secret. What medicine
he is offering for sale only he himself knows.
Bnt the secret medicine he is selling is after all no great mystery — it is only a
qnack medicine !
The medicine Jessup is selling was offered in Japan, South Korea, Taiwan,
Philippines, Vietnam, Singapore and now in Indonesia. It is reported that it will
be brought to Rangoon and Bangkok. In the Bangkok American Foreign Service
Officers (Conference special instructions will be given for the sale of "anti com-
munism" medicine.
Well, has this "anti communism" medicine trade of Jessup had any success?
No. it is a failure !
The cause of his failure is his misunderstanding of the main problem : The
chief aspiration of all Asiatics at present is. as pointed out by Nehru, "Colonial-
ism. Quit Asia ! The Asiatics must be fully independent." But Jessup appa-
rently does not realize this. On the other hand, he is applying the "colonialism
whip" harder and harder.
As evidence, let us look at Vietnam. The fact that the U. S. is going to recog-
nize Bao Dai is a clear proof of its motive. Vietnam is a puppet of France. This
can be seen from the transfer of sovereignty agreement signed on December 30,
1949. In that agreement it was said down !
KWRinden/rnm 2-1-50
% 1 1
Radio Peking Broadcast to China and Overseas, February IS, 1950, as Trans-
lated From the Mandarin and Published in the Official Daily Report of
THE Foreign Broadcast Information Service of the United States (No.
31-1950) AT Pages BBB 1-2, Concerning Ambassador Jessup's Recent Trip
to the Far East
China, February I4, 1950.
Bangkok Conference to Plan New Schemes.
Peking, in Mandarin, to China and Overseas, February 13, 1950, 1230 GMT — R.
(Anonymous Commentary on "American Ambassador Jessup's So-Called For
Eastern Tour of Inspection".)
"In the middle of this month, the conference of American far eastern diplo-
matic personnel will meet in Bangkok, the capital of Thailand, to discuss the
over-all American plan for aggression in the Far East.
"Some time ago, the American imperialists had made intensive plans for this
conference. The head of this conference, American Ambassador Jessup, left
America last year on Dec. 22 for the Far East to carry out his nefarious schemes.
■•Within the Ijist month. Jessup has been to Japan, South Korea, Okinawa,
Taiwan. Hong Kong, Philippines, Viet Nam, Indonesia, Sinq;apore, and Burma.
"Every time Jessup reached a place, he held secret meetings with the local
leaders on the so-called conditions for anti-Communism.
"meetings in TAIWAN
"On Jan. 15. when Jessup arrived in Taiwan, he met with the head of the
Kuomintang, Chiang Kai-.shek. Wu Kuo-chen, Ten Hsi-shan, and Chen Cheng
for secret talks. The Kuomintang CENTRAL NEWS reports that Jessup ex-
changed views with the bandit Chiang on the Far Eastern situation and the
world problem of anti-Communism. They discussed * * *, the military
aspects of the defense of Taiwan, and other military problems relating to politics
and economics.
"When Jessup arrived in the ea«t, on Jan. 18, he issued a statement on
the policy for the Far East and Asia. In this statement, he openly stated the
points which the American imperialists opposed their enemy, the peoples of
Asia.
"The American imperialists have a clear policy for the Far East. That is to
say, America will continue to use force and other similar measures to oppress
222 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVEISTIGATTON
the people's liberation movement in Asia. She will support reactionary control
In the countries, so that she can compromise the nation's independence and make
them into American colonial territories and protectorates.
"arrival in INDOCHINA
"On Jan. 27, after Jessup's arrival in Hanoi, Indochina, he personally called
upon the puppet king of Viet Nam, Bao Dai, and the puppet premier, Nguyen
Phan Long. He also delivered American Secretary of State Acheson's letter of
congratulations to Bao Dai.
"This letter stated : 'America is willing to establish close relations ; that is to
say, is willing to recognize the puppet Bao Dai regime.'
"Not long afterwards, on Feb. 7, the American Government recognized the
Bao Dai regime forthwith. At the san^e time, under Jessup's direction, Amer-
ican arms flowed to Indochina for Bao Dai.
"After staying in Viet Nam for a few days, Jessup arrived in the capital of
Indonesia on Jan. 29. The reactionaiT leaders of Indonesia, Sukarno, Hatta,
etc., held secret talks with him. At this time American arms were shipped to
Indonesia for Sukarno and his group to oppose the liberation movement of the
people of Indonesia.
"After Jessup had left Jakarta and had arrived in Singapore, he made a broad-
cast speech on the evening of Feb. 6 in which lie exposed the American imperi-
alists plans for aggression in the Far East. He insisted that the western nations
had the right to drastic steps in Southeast Asia.
"point 4 PROGRAM
"Jessup brought up Truman's plan for economic penetration known as the
so-called point 4 program. He said that this plan could bring universal pros-
perity to all peoples. This so-called coprosperity is not Jessup's new inven-
tion ; this scheme for aggression was long ago loudly proclaimed by the Japanese
Fascists, such as the so-called joint prosperity, greater East Asia coprosperity
sphere etc.
"The people of Asia know the meaning of these words. On the morning of
Feb. 8, Jessup enplaned for Rangoon, Burma, the last point of aggression before
his arrival in Bangkok. .
"From reviewing the past two months of Jessup's secret negotiations in the
different parts of Asia, we can see what the Bangkok conference is like. There
is no doubt that this conference is to discuss American imperialist aggression
in Asia. , - , ,
"Because of the great victory of the Chinese people, the struggle of the people
of Asia for democracv and independence has been growing daily. American
imperialists have received a serious blow. The American imperialists in order
to overcome their losses in Asia and the Far Ea.st are planning new schemes to
enslave the peoples of Asia. The Bangkok conference has been convened for
this purpose. But the people of China and the other countries of Asia are grow-
ing exceedingly powerful. They know that imperialism is only a blufE, and all
its schemes will fail."
Radio Moscow English Language Broadcast to Southeast Asia, February 13,
1950, as Published in the Official Daily Report of the Foreign Broadcast
Information Service of the United States (No. 31, 19.10), at Pages CC 5-6,
Concerning Ambassador Jessup's Recent Trip in the Far East
USSR : Overseas and Far East,
February U, 1950.
In 1871 the Germans obtained the drawings of Russian ice breakers and built
similar boats. The first oceangoing ice breaker was constructed in Russia in
the latter part of the nineteenth century. Today the Soviet Union has the
largest fleet of ice boats.
Bangkok Parley to Plan Paciflc Union.
Moscow, in English, to Southeast Asia, Feb. 13. 1950, 1600 GMT-L.
(Commentary on the Conference of the U. S. diplomats, which opens in Bangkok
on Feb. 14.)
The conference of U. S. diplomats opens in Bangkok today. U. S. intelligence
agents and spies, agents of Wall Street in Southeast Asia who have taken the
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 223
guise of diplomats are meeting togetlier. Judging by reports from the foreign
press, the ci inference is to discuss the plan of struggle against the Chinese People's
Republic and the national liberation movement in Asia.
The New York Herald Tribune has reported that immediately after the procla-
mation of the Chinese People's Republic the State Department decided to draw
up what is called "a positive policy" with regard to China and the other coun-
tries of the Far East and Southeast Asia. A special commission was set up under
Dr. .Jessup to work out concrete steps. The paper also revealed that the main
ta.sk before the commission was to work out a general plan of combat in Asia.
The U. S. militarists are laying the ground for larg.'-scale intervention in
Asia, and they are doing it under the guise of economic aid to the underdeveloped
and dependent countries, as formulated in Truman's Point Four program. They
are thus trying to stem the rising tide of the national liberation movement in
order to turn the territories of the Far East and Southeast Asia into U. S.
colonies and into military bases for fighting against the Chinese People's Republic
and for unleashing a new World War.
TOUR OF JESSUP
Shortly after Jessup's arrival in Tokyo, there was held a conference of U. S.
Chiefs of Staff. This conference discussed MacArthur's plan for converting
Japan into an advance outpost of the U. S. strategic defenses ; that is, of U. S.
aggression in the Pacific. In this connection, the conference considered the ques-
tion of including Japan as a member of the so-called Pacific Union. The U. S-
sponsors of this aggressive union intend Japan to play the role of gendarme to
strangle the national liberation movement. However, the foremost task of the
Japanese militarists is to render aid to the Kuomintang i-emnants on Taiwan.
This help is already being given.
As has been reported in the American press, Jessup spent his time on Taiwan
making a thorough revision of Kuomintang finances and in holding a number of
secret conferences with the representatives of the Kuomintang clique. Apart
from Chiang Kai-shek, Jessup met other jiuppets and reactionaries, the U. S.
agents in Southeast Asia and the Pacific. He also conferred with the heads of
the colonial administrations of Britain, France, and the Netherlands, assuring
them all of U. S. active help and support.
Speaking at a press conference in Singapore, Jessup said that urgent measures
would have to be taken to stem the advance of communism in southeast Asia.
And so to halt the further spread of the national liberation movement, the
U. S. imperialists are now feverishly searching around for new bases and
new agents. They are putting their stakes on the Japanese militarists. They
are tiyiug to breathe new life into the political corpse of Chiang Kai-shek, to
muster all the reactionary forces of the Far East and Southeast Asia together
in an aggressive Pacific Union.
But all these attempts are in vain. Jessup made a broadcast at Singapore
in which he made the admission that his stay in Asia had been a disappointment.
Ever more energetic action is being taken by the peoples of the colonial and
dependent countries against the Anglo-U. S. imperialists and their hirelings and
puppets. China has liberated herself, she is an independent country. The
imperialists are being thrown out of Viet Nam.
The peoples of Malaya and Burma are rising in a struggle for liberation.
The mighty national liberation movement of the peoples of Asia is mounting
day by day, and .Jessup could not but feel it. The New Yoi'k Herald Trb'ine
has had to admit that the situation in the Far East is so bad that it would be
absurd to suggest that a few arms, aircraft, capital investments, or diplomatic
ruses could save the position. That really is so; nothing can help the U. S.
imperialists now.
224 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY LNVE'STIGATION
EXCEKPT AND SUMMARY OF ARTICLE IN IZVESTIA ON MARCH 3, 1950, COMMENTING
ON Ambassador Jessxjp's Trip
[The document which contains the excerpts and summary is an official plain language
telegram to the Department of State from Moscow]
incoming telegram
Department of State — Division of Communications and Records
Control 1758
Rec'd March 3, 1950, 7 : 45 p. m.
From : Moscow.
To : Secretary of State.
No. 740, March 3.
Sent Department 740. Department Pass Delhi 18, Karachi 12.
Izvestla March 3 prints % article bad reception Jessup India. States goal
trip India, Pakistan. Afghanistan to bring countries into "Pacific aggressive
bloc" not secret. "Discomforting results conference Bangkok and evidence re-
ceived by Jessup that Paciiic bloc idea does not elicit enthusiasm countries Asia
forced Jessup strengthen pressure ruling circles India, Pakistan." At press con-
ference February 23 Jessup used all means "tlattery and advertisement Ameri-
can 'aid backward areas' and more than all of course slanderous inventions
against USSR' to change "established Indian opinion, according his own acknowl-
edgement, that USA striving for world domination, that they are 'conducting
struggle for control' over people Asia and would wish create more military bases
particularly Nepal, Kashmir."
Jessup mission failure since could not conceal "imperialist aggressive char-
acter US policy." "Even in bourgeois Indian press' this revealed. Quotes "search-
light" effect Americans not welcomed Southeast Asia as liberators, "we suffered
much from colonial domination, don't wish cropping up wars on doorstep."
Quotes "Indian NEWS CHRONICLE" effect accusations Soviet imperialism
more convincing if Soviet not French, British troops occupy Indochina, Malay,
Soviet not American planes given Chiang bomb civilians Shanghai, "only foreign
domination which people Asia know is domination western powers."
Barbour.
LWH : EMS
NOTE : Relayed to New Delhi, Karachi, 7 : 50 p. m. 3/3/50— MB PLAIN
I
Official Translation by the Division of Research for Europe, United States
Department of State, of an Article Appearing in the Soviet Newspaper
Izvestia, March, 3, 1950, Concerning Ambassador Jessup's Recent Trip in
THE Far East
Taken From Isvestia, March 3, 1950
After the conclusion in Bangkok of a conference of American diplomatic repre-
sentatives in the countries of Asia and the Pacific Ocean, the director of this
conference, the representative of the United States Department of State, Jessup,
made a trip to India, Pakistan and Afghanistan. The aim of this journey does
not present a secret to anyone. Jessup's task is to convince the governments of
these countries to enter into a Pacific aggressive block whose creation was
planned at the conference at Bangkok.
It must be said that if, before the conference in Bangkok and in the conference
itself, Jessup took measures to keep the aggressive intentions of the United
States secret, then on arriving in Delhi he himself destroyed the fruits of his
previous efforts. It is evident that the unsatisfactory results of the conference in
Bangkok and the information received by Jessup that the idea of a Pacific block
does not provoke enthusiasm in the countries of Asia, forced him to increase
pressure on the ruling circles of India and Pakistan. At a press conference
arranged on February 23 in Delhi, Jessup set out to obtain a change of view in
Indian public opinion. Jessup brought into action all kinds of means: flattery,
and publicizing of the American "assistance to backward regions" and most of all,
of course, slanderous fabrications against the U. S. S. R. With these weapons
Jessup b;'gan a campaign against the opinion which, according to his own
admission, had formed itself in India that the U. S. is striving for world
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 225
doniiiiMtiun, that it "carries on a struggle for power" over the peoples of Asia and
WDiilil like to create numerous new military bases, in particular, in the Nepal
anil Kashmir. lu general, Jessup tried with all his might but he had little
success. The imperialistic aggressive character of the policy of the United States
throughout the world, and in Asia in particular, is so evident that no hypocritical
speeches and anti-communist phillipics could hide it. This is seen according to
the reaction to the visits of Jessup to India which has appeared even in the
bourgeois Indian press. Here are some of those reactions :
The paper Searchlight : "The supposition that the Americans are welcomed in
Southeast Asia as liberators is idiotic and shameless * * *. We have suffered
much from colonial mastery and we do not want the start of a war at our
doorstep." . ,. ,
The paper Indian News Chronicle: "The accusation of 'Soviet imperialism
would be more convincing if it was Soviet and not French troops who are occupy-
ing Indochina, if it were Soviet and not English forces who are occupying Malaya.
The accusation about 'Soviet intervention' would be more convincing if it were
Soviet and not American planes given to Chiang Kai-shek who are bombing the
civilian population of Shanghai * * * the only foreign domination which is
known by the people of Asia— that is, the domination of the Western Powers."
This declaration of an Indian newspaper scores a target right in the face of
the American imperialists and their partners in Colonial looting. Mr. Jessup
has difficulty in finding people who would oi)enly agree to defend American policy
in Asia and as far as touching the secret combinations which are being organized
by Jessup in the capitols of Asiatic countries, they will inevitably fail as has
often happened with a foreign policy of American ruling circles.
(Signed) Observer.
Ambassador Jessup. So you see, while I was on this mission, I was
attacked by two sources, Izvestia and Senator McCarthy. Anyone
who believes in the concept of fjuilt by association might draw some
startling conclusions from this fact. However, I do not believe in the
concept of guilt by association.
Senator Hickenlooper. Mr. Chairman, at that point, might I ask
Mr. Jessup a question ?
Senator Ttdixgs. Would you like to let him finish and then interro-
gate him, so we won't be charged with heckling; or would you like to
do it now ?
Senator Hickenlooper. I shall bow to the suggestion of the chair-
man.
Senator Tydings. I think he should finish his statement.
Ambassador Jessup. Thank you, sir.
As the Attorney General stated in a letter to Seth W. Richardson,
Chairman. Loyalty Review Board, Civil Service Commission, dated
November 24, 1947, "Guilt by association has never been one of the
principles of American jurisprudence."
Moreover, Mr. Chairman, I do believe that anyone who, without
adequate proof, levels a charge of conscious or ignorant support of
communism at a Member of the United States Senate, or at an official
of the United States Government, is irresponsible. I have no evidence
that Senator McCarthy was motivated by a desire to assist the interna-
tional Communist movement, even though his words and actions have
liad that effect. I therefore reject this first possibility concerning the
reasons for the insinuations made against me.
A second possibility might be that such an attempt to discredit the
position of the United States in its relations with tlie other free coun-
tries of the world was inspired by sheer partisanship. It is hard to
believe that anyone holding the position of a Member of either House
of Congress of the United States would so subordinate the interests of
his country to sheer partisan advantage. I am sure no one of our
226 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY ENYE'STIGATION
major parties would do so. I shall therefore pass on to a third
possibility.
The third possibility might be that the person bringing these charges
had made a careful investigation and was convinced they were true
and so serious that they ought to be made public even before the indi-
vidual concerned had been asked for his side of the story.
Are these charges and insinuations true ? Senator McCarthy asserts
that I was a "sponsor" of the American-Russian Institute. It is true
that my name appeai-s on a list of the sponsors of a dinner given by
the American-Russian Institute, but not as a sponsor of the organiza-
tion itself. The dinner in question was one given on May 7, 1946, on
the occasion of the presentation of its first annual award to Franklin
D. Roosevelt, which was accepted on behalf of his family. Senator
McCarthy pointed out that the names of Howard Fast, Saul Mills,
Ella Winter, John Howard Lawson, and Langston Hughes also ap-
peared on this list. He did not point out that approximately 100 peo-
ple were named on this list of sponsors and that it also included such
names as H. V. Kaltenborn; George Fielding Eliot; Dean Christian
Gauss, of Princeton; and Mary Emma Wooley, former president of
Holyoke. The entire list of them is already in evidence as an exhibit
of this committee, and the committee can make its own judgment as to
the caliber and variety of the ])eople who are on it. A search of my
files has failed to reveal any information concerning this incident, nor
do I remember attending the dinner. From approximately February
to June of the year 1946 I was seriously ill in a hospital in New York
City, so it is unlikely that I attended.
I do recall, however, that I was asked by Mr. William Lancaster,
a prominent New York lawyer, to permit my name to be used as a
sponsor of a dinner which was to be held on October 19, 1944. I had
met Mr. Lancaster particularly through his activities on the Foreign
Policy Association, at a time when Gen. Frank McCoy was presi-
dent and Senator Alexander Smith and I were members of the board.
I accepted that invitation in 1944 but was unable to attend the dinner.
I shall be glad to make the entire list of approximately 250 sponsors
available to the committee.
It is, however, utterly irrelevant to the charges or insinuations that
I or anyone else agreed to sponsor dinners of the American-Russian
Institute of New York City in 1944 or 1946. There was no reason why
a loyal American should not have done so. The Attorney General
expressly excluded the American-Russian Institute of New York fromi
the first "lists of subversive publications which were published and did
not include it until April 21, 1949. The committee may be interested
in knowing that I turned down invitations to speak at dinners held
by this organization in both 1948 and 1949.
During the course of my life I have participated in many organi-
zations. These organizations have been of a type that one would
normally associate with a person of my outlook and interests. They
include the American Philosophical Society, founded by Benjamin
Franklin; the Foreign Policy Association; the American Society
of International Law ; the Sigma Phi Society ; the Carnegie Endow-
ment for International Peace; the American Bar Association; and
f the American Legion. From 1933 to 1946 I was closely associated
with the Institute of Pacific Relations. I am proud of my association
with that organization, which was founded by a group of leading
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 227
businessmen and scliolars in Honolulu sometime in the midtwenties
for tlie purpose of increasing knowledge and friendship among the
peoples of the Pacific area. Despite the controversy which has occa-
sionally surrounded it, that organization continued to discharge the
functions for which it was created. Although there is still much to
be done in increasing the knowledge of the American people about
countries of the Pacific area, the institute has made a real contribu-
tion to the advance which has been made in this field during the last
25 years.
I first became associated with it in 1933, when the late Newton
D. Baker wns its chairman. It is necessary to explain that the Institute
of Pacific Eelations is an international organization composed of
national councils in countries touching upon or having close inter-
ests in the Pacific area. My first contact with the organization was
to attend in 1933 one of the periodic international conferences which
have been held by the organization. In those meetings leaders of
business and banking, former high officials of government, journalists,
labor leaders, researchers, and teachers from all of the Pacific coun-
tries have met for a common study of the problems of the area. Many
of the leading figures whom I have since met in the United Nations
I first met through my connection with the Institute of Pacific Rela-
tions, including Mrs. Pandit, presently Indian Ambassador to the
United States, and Dr. Hu Shih, the great Chinese philosopher who
was former Chinese Ambassador in Washington. As indicative of
the type of personnel attending these conferences, I should also like to
refer to the one held in Hot Springs, Va., in 1945, at which I was
chairman of the American delegation and Admiral Thomas C. Hart,
later United States Senator from Connecticut, was vice chairman.
I was a member of the board of trustees of the American council
of the institute from about 1933 until my resiijnation because of health
and the pressure of other work in 1946. I was chairman of the board
of trustees of the American council during 1939 and 1940. I was the
chairman of the Pacific council from 1939 to 1942. I have also at
various times served as a member of the executive committee of the
American council and in 1944 as chairman of the research advisory
committee. I was succeeded as chairman of the American council
by the late Dr. Ray Lyman Wilbur, president of Stanford University,
who, m turn, was succeeded by Robert G. Sproul, president of the
University of California, and now by Gerard Swope, honorary presi-
dent of the General Electric Co. Throughout my connection with
the institute, the board of trustees has included leaders of American
business, finance, and academic and public life.
Now, ]\Ir. Chairman, I would assume that anyone who was interested
in inquiring into what I had done and what I have stood for would
be interested in my entire life and background. An inquiry into my
background would have shown that my ancestors came to this country
from I]ngland in the seventeenth century and settled on Lono- Island
and in Pennsylvania and New England. My great-grandfather,
Judge William Jessup, of ^Montrose, Pa., was a delegate to the'
Republican convention of 18f;0, which nominated Abraham Lincoln
for the Presidency. He was chairman of the committee which drafted
the platform upon which Lincoln was elected. A great-grandfather
on my mother's side, John M. Butler, as a Pennsylvania delegate, cast
228 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY IN\'E'STIGATION
his vote for Lincoln at that same convention. My father was a
lawyer in New York City and a lay leader in the Presbyterian
Church. On my mother's side my forebears were Irish and also amon<j
the early settlers of this country. ,
While the Bolshevik revolution was o;ainino- control in Russia, I
was servino- as a private in the Olne Hundred and Seventh Infantry
in the AEF in France. Shortly after the armistice I returned to
Hamilton College in central New York to finish my education, which
had been interrupted by my enlistment in the Army.
Now, one hears in these days that some individuals have been misled
during their college years to espouse radical doctrines, including the
Communist philosophy. If I had developed any radical tendencies
in that period, they presumably would have been revealed in my im-
mediately subsequent activities. Actually, on leaving college I took
a position as assistant to the president of the First National Bank of
Utica, N. Y. I remained with the bank for 2 years, subsequently
becoming assistant cashier. During those 2 years in Utica, I was
also superintendent of the Sunday school of the First Presbyterian
Church and commander of a local post of the American Legion. I am
still a member of the American Legion.
In July 1921 I married Lois Walcott Kellogg, whose ancestors were
.ulso of English and Dutch pioneer stock and whose mother was a
sister of the late Frederic C. Walcott, United States Senator from
Connecticut.
During my service in the Army I had developed an overwhelming
desire to devote my life to promoting the cause of international peace,
and with this purpose in mind I resigned my position at the bank
soon after my marriage and entered the Columbia University Law
School. At tins stage, as later in my life, I had the privilege of secur-
ino- the advice of the late Elihu Root, who had lived on the campus of
Hamilton College and whom I came to know there. After 2 years at
Columbia, I transferred to Yale University and received my bachelor
of laws degree there in 1924. Immediately afterward I secured a posi-
tion as assfstant to the Solicitor in the Department of State and served
in this capacity for a year before going back to Columbia as lecturer
in international law. I have been on the Columbia faculty ever since.
1 am now on leave from my present position as Hamilton Fish pro-
fessor of international law and diplomacy. , ,
In 1925-26, when the Senate of the United States was considering
a^ain the question of American accession to the World Court, I served
as personal research assistant to the late Senator Irvmg Lenroot, of
Wisconsin. , -, , o . ^ o^ ^ rr n
In 1929 Mr. Elihu Root was asked by Secretary of State Kellogg
to represent the United States at a Conference of Jurists m Geneva,
at which the question of United States accesion to the Statute of the
World Court was considered. Mr. Root, whose views about Russian
communism are certainly a matter of public record, invited me to go
alonfr with him as his assistant. I am proud to say that I continued
to enloy Mr. Root's confidence and friendship until his death m 1937.
Not long after I had accompanied him to the Conference of Jurists,
be authorized me to write his biography, and I spent a good deal of my
time between 1931 and 1937 on its preparation The biography was
iniblished in 1937, and covers the wide range of American law, bu^
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 229
ness, politics, and diplomacy which filled tho life of that very great
American statesman and leader both of the American bar and the
Republican Party. In 19:50, Mr. Harry Gucroenheim, who had just
beeii a])pointod by President Hoover as United States Ambassador
to Cuba, invited me to oo to Cuba with him as his personal legal
adviser. I served with him there for about 9 months.
After several yeai-s back at Columbia, I was called back into public
service by Governor, now Senator, llerbeil H. Lehman, who in 1943
asked me to come to Washington as Chief of the Division of Training
and Personnel in the Office of Foreign Relief and Rehabilitation Opei^
ations which he was then organizing. In December of that year, I
served as Assistant Secretary General of the P'irst Conference of the
United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration, commonly
known as UNRRA, and in 1944 I served in a similar capacity at the
United Nations Monetary and Financial Conference at Bretton Woods.
iNIeanwhile, during a period from 1942 to 1945, I was the associate
director of the Naval School of Military Government and Administra-
tion, established at Columbia University at the request of the United
States NaA^y Department. In that school we trained some 500 officers
for service in occupied areas in the Pacific area. During part of that
time, I was also serving as consultant to the Navy Department in
Washington, as a lecturer at the Army School of Military Government
at the I'niversity of Virginia, and 'as a lecturer in the Navy War
( ^ollege at Newport. I had previously lectured at the Navy War Col-
lege in 1931, 1939, and 1941. I might add that since the war I have
also delivered two lectures at the National War College in Washing-
Ion, and in 1948 was invited to become a member of the National
War College staff. I was unable to accept this appointment because of
my duties with the Department of State.
Just before the San Francisco Conference in 1945 the then Solicitor
General, ^Ir. Charles Fahy, and I served, together with I^Ir. Green
Tlackworth, as members of a committee of jurists who pre]-)ared a pre-
liminary draft of the statute of the International Court of Justice. I
then served with the United States Delegation to the United Nations
Conference at San Francisco as an assistant on judicial organization,
and thereafter continued as a consultant to the Department of State.
In 1947 I was appointed as the United States member of a UN com-
mittee on the Codification and development of international law.
On January 3, 1948, I was appointed deputy United States repre-
sentative on the Interim Committee of the General Assembly of the
I nited Nations. On April 14, 1948, my apopintment as United States
representative to the second special session of the United Nations Gen-
eral Assembly was confirmed by the United States Senate. On June
1, 1948, the Senate confirmed my appointment as deputy United States
representative in the United Nations Security Council. On March 1,
1949, my appointments as United States Ambassador at Large and
also as United States representative to the third regular session of the
General Assembly were confirmed by the Senate, and last September
26 I was again confirmed by the Senate as a United States representa-
tive to the fourth regular session of the General Assembly.
So niiich for the record of my career. It does not read like the
record of a Communist, a pro-Communist or a fellow traveler.
At the beginning of my statement I said that the insinuations which
liad been leveled against me had the effect of impairing the confidence
230 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVE'STIGATION
of otlier government in the United States and its representatives. I
made that statement because it would be impossible to reconcile the
actions I have taken both in the course of my recent trip to Asia
and in the course of the last 2 years with the Department of State with
"an unusual affinity for Communist causes." I shall submit to the
committee for insertion in the record, a collection of extracts from
statements which I have made on the subject of communism. Merely
by way of illustration I would like to read from a statement which I
made in the Political Committee of the General Assembly last
December in the debate on China, and I was speaking, sir, to the chair-
man of the committee. There I said :
* * * I hope, Mr. Chairman, it will be crystal clear that the United States
policy is against imperialism everywhere. We flatly reject it for ourselves and
we condemn it when practiced by any other state. We condemn it specifically
as revealed in the Soviet-Russian continuation of Tsarist-Paissian imperialism
in the Far East. Our concern is that China, India, and all Asia be safeguarded
against Soviet Russia or any other aggression.
That is the end of the quotation. , xi -j
I believe that I should be judged not merely by what I have said
but also by what I have done. 1 have already indicated that I. have
had the honor of representing the United States m the Security
Council of the United Nations, in the Interim Committee of the Gen-
eral Assembly of the United Nations, and in one special and two
regular sessions of the General Assembly. The proceedings of these
bodies are public and their records are published. ^ .
I shall submit, sir, for insertion in the record, official authenticated
copies of sections of the proceedings of the organs of the Jnited
Nations in which I acted; and also, copies of statements wnich I have
made to the press, and over the radio in the course of my Asian trips.
I have these here for insertion.
Senator Tydings. They will be inserted in the record at this point,
and I am not sure that you want the whole records, or just sections of
it that are pertinent, or that pertain to you? ,
Ambassador Jessup. I am quite content, sir, merely to have inserted
in the record the excerpts which will be marked as showing particular
passages in my statements dealing with the questions of international
communism. .,, , . ^ i • ..i a ^
Senator Tydings. Those excerpts will be inserted m the record at
this point, and should the committee desire, the whole record will be
available for further examination.
(The matter referred to is as follows :)
Exhibit 2 — Jessup
Statements by Ambassadob Jessup on the Subject of Communism
(1) Excerpts from statement to the Security Council on October 4, 1948.
(2) Excerpts from a statement to the Security Council on October 19, 1J48.
(3) Excerpts from a statement to the Security Council on October 25, 1J4J.
(4) Excerpts from statement to the Security Council on January 11, 194y.
(5) Excerpts from a speech on February 18, 1949.
(6) Excerpt from a speech on March 12, 1949.
(7) Excerpts from a speech on April 7, 1949.
(8) Excerpts from a speech on August 24, 1949.
(9) p]xcerpts from a speech on September 6, 1949.
(10) Excerpts from statement in Committee I of the General Assembly on
Novcmlier 2S, 1949. „ , . tt • at v..,
(11) Excernts from a speech to the English Speaking Union on November
28, 1949.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 231
(lii) ExciM-pt from statement to Committee I of the General Assembly, on
December (i, 19-19.
(LS) Text of statement to the General Assembly on DecemlxT 7, 1949.
(14) Excerpts from statement to the press, Hons Kong, January 18, 1950.
(15) Excerpts fi'om a broadcast over Radio RIalaya, on Febi'uary (i, 1950.
(Iti) Excerpts from speech over Kadio Thailand on Felinuiry 17, 1950.
(17) Excerpts from statement to the New Delhi press on February 23, 1950.
(18) Statement to the Security Council on October 6, 1948.
ExCERi'T From Statement by AMn.\ssADOR Jessup tn the Security Council of the
UN on October 4, 1948
The source of this speech can be found in the official records of the Security Council, three-
hundred-and-sixty-flrst meeting, October 4, 1948 [No. 113], at pages 24-26
The Government of the United States believes in the purposes set forth in
article 1 of the Charter and in the principles stated in article 2 of the Charter.
It is because we believe in these purposes and principles that we have joined in
referring this case to the Security Council. The representative of the U. S. S. R.
made a number of references to the desirability of respecting signatures to inter-
national agreements. I would like to point out that the Charter of the United
Nations is an international agreement and that it bears the signature of the
U. S. S. R.
In accordance with our obligations under article 33 of that Charter, the Govern-
ment of the United States, in agreement with the Governments of France and the
United Kingdom has made every elTort to remove the threat to the peace created
by the U. S. S. R., through direct discussions with the Government of the Soviet
Union. The systematic periodic evasion and repudiation of the promises by that
Government has made further i-ecourse to these direct discussions futile. Mean-
while, the U. S. S. R. continues, in violation of its obligations under the Charter,
to apply force or the threat of force against the Governments of the United
States, France, and the United Kingdom.
The representative of the Soviet Union has intimated, as liis Government has
already alleged, that the illegal U. S. S. R. blockade measures were imposed in
retaliation for the lawful steps relating to currency taken by the Western Powers
in the western zones but, as I shall explain later to the Security Council when
we come to the substance of the question, the U. S. S. R. measures and the motive
liehind them were revealed some months before the currency measures of the
Western Powers were put into effect.
Any such argument on the part of the U. S. S. R. will not succeed in obscuring
the actual situation which confronted the Governments of the United States,
France, and the United Kingdom and to which I have just referred. Faced with
that situation, the three Governments were confronted with the following alterna-
tives. One, they could have supinely bowed to the U. S. S. R. use of force ; or two,
they could in turn have resorted to force to meet the force of the U. S. S. R. ;
or three, they could have recognized the fact stated in article 24 of the Charter
that the Security Council has "primary responsibility for the maintenance of
international peace and security * * *".
The Governments of the United States, France, and the United Kingdom chose
that third alternative. It was the only alternative consistent with the obligations
of a mi'iiiber of the United Nations. It was a recognition of the conviction of the
three Governments that the United Nations is and will remain the cornerstone
on which the structure of peace must be built.
The Government of the U. S. S. R. has been loud in its protestations of support
for the United Nations. If these protestations had been sincere they would have
welcomed an opportunity to invoke the assistance of the Security Council in
bringing about a termination of the present serious situation in order that all
questions and issues between them and the Governments of the United States,
France, and the United Kingdom might be solved by peaceful means. The Gov-
ernment of the U. S. S. R. has not taken that course. It repudiates the ma-
chinery of pacific settlement established by the United Nations. The U. S. S. R.
•It-nies that the United Nations is an organ to which the peoples of the world
can tnrn for help in maintaining international peace and security.
Again, at this point. I would cite to the representative of the U. S. S. R.
the great Latin maxim to which he has referred, pacta servanda sunt. The
U. S. S. R., in repudiating the machinery of peaceful settlement, and repudiating
its obligations under the Charter, is trying to secure for itself unihiteral free-
dom to resort to force. It is evidently unwilling to have the Security Council
68970 — 30 — pt. 1 16
232 STATE DEPARTMET^'T EMPLOYEE LOYALTY n^'EOTIGATION
and the public opinion of tlie world examine the record in this case. The
Gove r meTof the United States, acting in accord with the Governments of
France Ind the United Kingdom, is, on the other hand, ready and willing to
ha?e this Council of this great world organization examine the records and
iSike its condition to the maintenance of international peace and security.
If the U S S R wants peace, let it welcome a resort to the United Na ions,
the instrument of peace. If the U. S. S. R. intends to support the United Na-
t ms let iT ac-;,ept the established procedures of the United Nations. We for
on -Dai t CO fntend to support the United Nations, and we are therefore invoking
ft LferU?e resort to diict discussion with the U. S. S. R. has failed to remove
letlu-eat to peace resorting to it in the hope that the Security Council, m dis-
clSi^eS its Sponsibilities under the Charter, can make its contribution where
other means have failed.
Excerpt From Statement by Ambassador Jessup in the Security Council of
Excerpt ^ijoM^ of October 19, 1948, Concerning the Berlin Question
[Source: Official records of the Security Council three hundred and sixty-eighth meeting
(iVO. lib), pp. Oi— 0-J
There is an aspect of the blockade measures which I particularly wish to re-
emT)hasize to th^ members of the Council. As I pointed out before, under a series
of^inteimational agreements, the four occupying powers undertook responsibiU-
Hes for me population of the sectors of Bt-rlin cmuiitted to their charge. The
hlockade s a method used by the U. S. S. R. for the expansion of its power m
uteisreVard of these joint responsibilities and with a callous indifference
S the effect of their measures on the population of the western sectors.
I woukl also remind the Council that it was not until a month alter the blockade
wnsimnsed that the U S S. R. made its offer to supply food and coal to the
wSte™ sec o rs. It was thus clear that it originally contemplated putting this
TesSie on the poindation, in an attempt to break their spirit and it was on y
after the succels of the airlift was demonsfated that an attempt was made to
counter the airlift with an offer of Soviet supplies. ^,t,,,.,i
This is the blockade which Mr. Vishinsky says is entirely mythical.
. Hs contention that there is no blockade has been amply disi.roved by the
facts The Soviet interpretation will, in any event, be somewhat disputed by the
21 million people who are the direct object of Soviet power politics, who are
faced with a choice between accepting the real and potential hardships of die
blockade or accepting Soviet political food and political coal and, hence, Soviet
ancl CommunS polifical domination. Their choice has been clear and unmis-
takeable from the beginning. They have chosen hardship and freedom, msjs
a hopeful sign for the future peace and securi y of ^"^'^If ' /^f, ^he f ke o^^^^^
the four povvers undertook the occupation of Germany. Let us not foiget that at
''''^^^S'V^l^l^^i^eement together, now and in the future, the other
measuretnecessai-y to assure that Germany never again wiU threaten her ii^eigh-
bors or the peace of the world. It is not the intention of the Allies to destioy or
eiismve the German people. It is the intention of the Allies that he German
peoi'le be Sven the opportunity to prepare for the eventual reconstruction of their
"'5Ct wra?;;ed'arp' tS^m'^^Th^^^ of the Soviet Union, using the
harsh in^l-ifment of the blockade, has. indeed chosen a strange way m Be,i^
to live up to its agreement to democratize German political lite. Thanks to the
airbridS and to the support given to it by the Berliners, the Government of the
Soviet Union has not succeeded in its purpose.
Excerpt From Statement by Ambassador Jessup in the Security Council of
THE UN on October 25, 1948, Concerning the Berlin Question
[Source : Official records of the Security Council, three hundred and seventy-second meeting
'■ (No. 120), pp. 11-13]
I have listened in vain, as he was speaking, for any suggestion in his remarks
that he too like the representatives of the three western Governments, was
amirou-hin"-' this draft resolution in a spirit of accommodation, in a^i effort to
set e the prob em of Berlin. On the contrary, he flatfootedly asserted that they
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 233
would contiuue the threat of their blockarle measures until the mark of the
Soviet Zone was established as the sole currency, not by free agreement but under
Soviet dictation.
The main issues wiiicb are before the Security Council have been made very
clear in our proceedings. A resolution, which was eminently fair, has been
put iH'fore us through the efforts of the six (Jovernnients which led to its formu-
lation. It .^eems to me that we must now ask what the Soviet Union wants.
Does the Soviet Union want a meeting of the Council of I'oreign Ministers
to discuss Berlin, or the unification of Germany which has always been, and
still is. the aim of the three western Governments, or to discuss the questions of
Germany as a wholeV The U. S. S. R. Govermnent can have such a meeting without
tlie threat of force. We have told them that before. We repeat that promise.
We have indicated our acceptance of the principle in our approval of the draft
resolution which is before us.
Does the Soviet Union want the Soviet zone mark established as the sole
currency in Berlin under four-power control, as Premier Stalin himself sug-
gested? They can have that without maintaining a blockade. We have told
them so before, and we tell them so again.
Does the Soviet Union want assurance that we do not want to use the four-
power cimtrol of the currency in Berlin to control the general economy of the
Soviet zone outside Berlin? They can have such assurance witliout threat
or violence. We liave made that clear before. We make it clear again.
Does the Soviet Union want guarantees to prevent the use of transport fa-
cilities for black-market operations in currency in Berlin? They can have such
guarantees without resorting to duress. Again, it is a matter which we have told
them before we would do, and we are ready to say so again. If the U. S. S. R.
Government will remove all the restrictions imposed on transportation, communi-
cations and commerce, subsequent to March 30. 1948, between the western zones
and Berlin, the United States Government will undertake to provide the safe-
guards for the western mark B and the eastern mark of the Soviet zone and
presented by the United States representative during the course of the Berlin
discussions.
As I understood the representative of the Soviet Union in his remarks a few
moments ago, he argued that the blockade measures which liave be?n imposed
by the U. S. S. R. were imposed to protect the economy of the Soviet zone
against the western mark. However, as I have had occasion to point out to
tlie Security Council before (thi-ee liundred sixty-third meeting), the blockade
measures began in January, reached a focal point on March 30, and the westerii
mark was not introduced until June 24. I think it necessary to point out again
that the matter or i-estrictions on traffic has nothing to do with the question
of safegimrds to prevent movements of currency. The removal of the blockade
restrictions imposed upon land and water commmiications by the U. S. S. R.
would restore the normal channels of supply and transport which are now
confined to the airlift. In effect, this would merely substitute the normal
ground means of transport for the present air means.
The United States never intended to use currency as a means of adversely af-
fecting tlie economy of the Soviet zone. The objective of currency reform is to
improve economic life and not to destroy it. If, on the other hand, the Soviet
Union wants to drive us out of Berlin — where we have an acknowledged right
to be — that result they cannot get by maintaining their threat to the peace. We
have stated that position over and over again, and that simple fact should now
be clear. If the U. S. S. R. wants us to work out the technical details of tlie first
four questions I put, under the duress of the maintenance of the blockade
measures, instead of throught the process of free negotiation, again the answer
to the question is "No." In short, the Government of the Soviet Union can obtain
all it says that it wants without maintaining the blockade. With the blockade,
it can get neither what it says it wants nor what its actions seem to suggest it
actually does want. It is the blockade which is the barrier, and it is the U. S. S. R.
which can lift the blockade.
Even now, despite the fact that the Soviet Union has seen fit to indicate that
it intends to bhjck the efforts of the Security Council of the United Nations,
if it wishes to end the threat to the peace which it created, the Berlin ques-
tion eaii l>e settle<i on the basis of the program suggested in the draft resolution
which is now before the Security Council. The three western Governments have
indicated their acceptance of the principles contained in that resolution. If the
Government of the U. S. S. R. would give recipi-ocal assurances that that pro-
gram suggested in that resolution would be carried out, it can be done.
234 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INYE'STIGATION
Excerpt From Statement by Ambassador Jessup in the Security Council on
January 11, 1949
r Source- Official records of the Security Council, three-hundred-and-ninety-eighth meeting
"• (No. 2), i)p. 9-10]
When this question of Indonesia was being discussed in the Security Council
in Paris, the Soviet Union, speaking both through its own representative and
through the representative of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, followed
its familiar prtjrvdure of endeavoring to cloak its own improper actions by
seeking to phn-e ti e blame on someone else. The representative of the U. S. S. R.
(three hundred ..n-i ninety-first meeting) and the representative of the Ukrainian
SSR (three hundred ninety-third meeting) both insinuated that the Government
of the United States was in some way responsible for the action of the Nether-
lands in resorting to hostilities against the Indonesian Republic. It thus be-
comes necessary to point out again certain salient facts. , „^ ^ ^ r, ^ ^
In the tirst place, it was the Government of the United States which took
the initiative in convening an urgent meeting of the Security Council when
it became apparent that the Netherlands was resorting to military action in
Indonesia (S/1128). It was the Government of the U. S. S. R. which endeavored
to prevent the Security Council from acting promptly by insisting that the
Council meeting should be deferred for 3 days. Every other member of the
Council attended the three hundred eighty-seventh meeting on December 20
except the two Soviet representatives. _
The United States also took the initiative, in conjunction with the repre-
sentatives of Colombia and Syria, in proposing a resolution (S/1142) to the
Security Council to deal with the situation, but the U. S. S. R. representative re-
fused to support this resolution (three hundred ninety-second meeting) . He later
tried to cover up this further attempt to block Security Council action by intro-
ducing a resolution of his own (S/1148 and S/1148/Corr. 1) which he knew
could not be adopted by the Council. M.n-e fundamental, however that these
obstructionist tactics in the Security Council, is the fact that the U. S. b. R. is
fundamentally opposed to the Government of the Republic of Indonesia and has
itself, through the Communist Party, which is, of course, its moutlipiece through-
out the world, sought to undermine and overthrow this Government.
No one doubts that the Communists in Indonesia like the Communists through-
out the world are responsive to and act in accordance with instructions from
Moscow The Communist revolt against the government of President Soekaino
and Premier Hatta was itself an effort on the part of the Government of the
U S S R to overthrow the Indonesian Republic. Furthermore, when the re-
sumption of hostilities by the Netherlands Government against the Indonesian
Renublic took place, the official Communist Party line, as printed m the Com-
munist press, instead of deploring this action, openly gloated that it was a
punishment for the government of President Soekamo and Premier Hatta,
which had successfully put down a Communist revolt. ^ ^v a • ^
The Communist line which, I repeat once more, means the hne of the Soviet
Government, accused that distinguished statesman of the Indonesian Republic,
Mr Hatta, of being a traitor to his country. At the very time when editorials
wei-e appearing to this effect in the Communist Party organs in Pans, the
USSR representative on the Security Council sought to cover up the actual
Dolicv of his Government by identifying liimself with the Council's endeavors to
secure the release of Mr. Hatta and other political prisoners (ninety-second
These are the facts, which are on the record and known to the world, and
which reveal that the Government of the U. S. S. R. is not interested in support-
ing the Government of the Indonesian Republic or in restoring peace to Indo-
nesia On the contrarv, it is following its familiar tactics which it has used
in Korea in Greece, in Berlin, and again, now, in Indonesia, and which have
been described in the speeches of many representatives at the last session of the
General Assembly— namely, seeking to overthrow a lawful democratic govern-
ment and to undermine its authority. But the U. S. S. R. does not want an
independent Indonesia; it wants an Indonesia under the domination and control
of a Communist minority taking its orders from Moscow. Anywhere in the
world when a Communist government climbs in through the window, independence
is kicked out of the door. . .
The Government of the United States, on the contrary, has viewed with
admiration the efforts of the Indonesian people, both in the Republic and else-
where to gain their independence, and it has steadfastly sought to support tnem„
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 235
The Government of the United States still takes that position, and it is for this
reason that it has taken tlie lead in endeavoring in the Securitv Council and
in the ( ommittee of Good Offices to bring about a peaceful adjustment of the
diflicnlties between the Indonesian Republic and the Netherlands Government
and to establish the United States of Indonesia as one of the fully sovereign and
in(lei)endent peoples of the world.
Excerpts From Spekch by Ambassador Jessup, February 18, 1949
[Source : Press release No. 550 of the United States delegation to the United Nations, dated
February 16, 1949]
Annex 6
Excerpts from Speech Before Nationat. Farm Ixstitxjte, February 18, 1949
The North Atlantic Pact does not by-pass the United Nations. It is not a
substitute lor the United Nations. It will not weaken the United Nations
It we did not intend to work through the United Nations we could boycott
the Intenni Committee or "Little Assembly." The Soviet Union has boycotted it
It we did not intend to work through the United Nations we could have acted
^l^]'^ l\,\ovea Instead we took the matter to the United Nations, helped a
United Nations Commission supervise elections in our zone and recognized the
Korean Government only after the United Nations General Assemblv had
adopted a resolution which acknowledged that this was a proper thing 'to do
The Soviet Union would not let the Ukraine accept a place on the Korean Com-
mission It would not let the Commission operate in the Soviet-occupation
zone. It supports a puppet Government in the northern part of Korea Three
days ago in the Security Council, the Soviet representative was repeating all
their oW arguments about Korea, in total disregard of the resolutions adopted
by the General Assembly.
If we did not intend to work through the United Nations, we would not have
taken the Berlin case to the Security Council. The Soviet Union refused to admit
tnat the Luited Aatiou.s or any organ of it could deal with the case. When the
Security Council discussed the question, Vishinsky sat in sulkv silence When
the Security Council voted, Vishinsky vetoed.
Ti^yj^\^^y United States cooperate in all the 13 specialized agencies of the
United Nations. The Soviet Union joined only three of them: and this week I
regret to say, the Soviet Union withdrew from one of those three— the World
Health Organziation.
Look at the records of United Nations meetings— General Assemblv, S'-curitv
Council. Economic and Social Council, Trusteeship Council, Commissions anil
Committees— dealing with atomic energy, disarmament, the struggle for human
rights, the struggle for peace in Indonesia, for peace in Palestine, for peace in
Kashmir, lor peace in the Balkans, and many other subjects, and vou will find
the proots of United States cooperation in the work of the United Nations The
record is long, our record is good. No American need be ashamed of the record
Every American should be proud of it. ci^uiu.
* * * I do not hesitate to say that the attitude of the Soviet Union is
making it more difficult for the United Nations to do its job. The USSR has
not yet begun to cooperate with the United Nations. Behind its iron 'curtain 'it
is manufacturing fear. Out in the open we along with 51 other countries are
building peace. Make no mistake about it, we are going to win But it is not
going to be an easy job or a short one. Peace is not merelv the end of a war
Peace has to be made and it also has to be kept. Nobody in the democratic
world can ever be unemployed if he or slie works for peace. You can work on
It lull time or part time— as a Government official or as a citizen. But we
rfp°e pfece of f ruTt'"'^ ""'^^'^ ^ ^'"^^ ^""^ ^''^'''''^ ^^''''^ ^"^ "^^^ '"^ ''"'' ^'^^ ^'^^ ^
1 ?t7fJTlinS^^^ ^'l^'^f ?*!'^"'l^ -'^"^ P""^^ ^""^ ^^^" *« ^'-e'-^te and maintain
of tSi^^Lt , 1 That «tate of tention is, of course, greatest in those parts
an nco^. . ,T^"'^'^?■^^•'''^■'* *^ *^^ ^°^'^' Union and the Red Army. It is
fn Pnr« H *l»:'"'^ '^""''""^ *''^* ^^""^ '" *'^^ U"'t^d Nations General Assembly
took'r.nn;fnf °^A^'' couutries of the world distrusted Soviet armaments and •
atomiP p1 <! '° ^"\^^ica° armaments. In the votes on resolutions dealing with
aromic eneigy and disarmament they showed that this is the way they feel We
236 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
deserve that confidence because we have no aggressive intent. AVe must and we
shall continue to deserve it. * * *
* * * What we have done and are doing is to .loin in a process of bringing
the nations of the world closer together— in the United Nations itself and in
groups of states which have common interests. So long as the smaller groups
Operate within the United Nations, inspired by its purposes and principles we
nre moving forward. I don't believe any of us here want to move in any o her
d[rec ion We may disagree among ourselves from time to t>me on he bes
road to take-Thank God we live in a country where we are free to disagree-but
1 think we will always agree on the objective which is peace and freedom.
In seedn- that objective we will cooperate with every other country which
is willfng act in accordance with the purposes and principles of tbe United
NaUons That includes the Soviet Union. We do not want any country to.
v^nrrestimate the seriousness with which we intend to support the peace system
foi whfch the United Nations stands. That, too, includes the Soviet Union.
'•Cpriarv purpose of these agreements," said President Tiniman, referring
to the Rio and North Atlantic Pacts, "is to provide unmistakable proof of the
oint deT^rndnation of the free countries to resist armed attack rom a^ Quarter^
Each country participating in these arrangements must contribute all it can to
*'"K rrn miTelt sufficiently clear, in advance, that any armed attack affect-
ing our national security^ would be met with overwhelming force, the armed
'''"irwoTiif also'be a'g'J-eat mistake for the Soviet Union or any other country
to thhik that we are hoeins a lone row. We are using modern machinery, to
harvest the biggest c?op in the world and there are nioi. ^han 50 nations helping
us. Any other country that wishes to join in the job is we come If Jhey join
with the rest of us, they will have the same satisfaction in looking in their pay
Sivelopes and finding each week, each month, each year that peace pays and
that it pays to work for it.
Excerpt From Speech by Ambassador Jessup on March 12, 1949
[Source: Press release No. 570 of the United States Mission to the United Nations, dated
March 11, 1949]
EXCERPT FROM SPEECH BEFORE THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOB THE
UNITED NATIONS, MARCH 12, 1949
Although the issues as they presented themselves to the ^wo assemblies were
not preciselv comparable, of course, the striking isolation of the negative six
Ztesot the Soviet bloc on issue after issue was clearly apparent. This develop-
ment was taken to mean different things by various observers. One implica
?on o^ this polarization, I believe, was that the major cleavage could no
onger be looked upon merely as a conflict between the Soviet Union and the
United States, nor as a conflict between the east and the west It had become
a cleavage be ween the Soviet bloc and the rest of the United Nations
TWs cleavage represents a victory for no one. The interests of the United
States a ebettei served bv a truly United Nations, than by one in which a
dangious cCn isolates an important part of the world. It was not our pur-
pose to create this isolation, even for an ill"««'-y ^^^"^•^■•'^"Tt fp Siet 5t^i S
it was rather the inflexible and uncooperative character of the Soviet attitudes
o^d such issues as disarmament and the control « atomic energy wh cj
drove the wedge between the Soviet Union and the majoiity of the Unitea
^ Ancrthose of you who were at Paris will recall that it was no "n^^cjiaidcal
maioritv" as it has sometimes been called in propaganda. It is much more
SXal^'to^^ak'f a •'mechanical -i-rity.: Witlun the majcvnty^ he demo-
cratic processes of accoinmod -tion. c-nrprririse. ,Mve-an>M.ik . ^^^^^/J^^.V' ;'":
Perhaps it could with more justice be said that the United States ""^^'^ "If ^^f ^^
res, msil ilities of leadership than that it exercised an "i" "^^ f ."^j"'^^f., "l
flue ce However, I venture to assert that the action of the United States
Delegation at the Paris Assembly fully recognized the responsibilities which
rest upon this country.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 237
In linip. one may liopo that tho Soviet TTnion. intlnenoed by this example of
tlie siuTessful nccomnKuhilion of a variety of interests and viewpoints within
tlie majority fjnnip. will come to appreciate more highly the mutual advantage
of wlioiehearted participation in the work and deliberations of the United
Nations. But in the me.mtime, this crystallization has had the effect of dem-
onstrating that even under present adverse circumstances the United Nations
can jierform essential functions.
Excerpts From a Speech by Ambassador Jessup on April 7, 1949
[Source: Department of State press release No. 221, April 5, 1949]
EXCERPTS FROM 'THE ATANTIC COMMUNITY AND THE UNITED NATIONS," ADDRESS
DEn-ERED BY AMBASSADOR JESSUP BEFORE THE ACADEMY OF POLITICAL SCIENCE.
NEW YORK, APRIL 7,194!)
"For the very reason that the North Atlantic Treatv is subject to and in ac-
cordance with the Charter of the United Nations, it cannot constitute a threat to
any other state whose policies and actions are also in conformity with the subject
to that same Charter.
"It would be less than frank, however, to avoid stating the fact that the con-
clusion of this treaty has resulted from the fears which the policv of the Soviet
Union has created.
"It is impossible to overlook the fundamental cleavage in the basic theory
of the Soviet Union on the one hand and of the United States on the other The
{soviet Union officially stands on the proposition tliat war is inevitable
"The Soviet Union is officially committed to a philosophy of conflict which is
alien to our thinking and to our ideals. Premier Stalin likes to quote the follow-
ing passage from Lenin :
" 'We live * * * not only in a state but in a system of states, and the
existence of the Soviet Republic side by side with the imperalist states for a
long time is unthinkable. In the end either one or the other will conquer And
until tliat end comes, a series of the most terrible collisions between the Soviet
Kepublic and the bourgeois states is inevitable.'
"We also believe that we live in a system of states, but from this premise is
drawn the opposite conclusion. Our conclusion is that it is unthinkable that the
members of that system of states should not be able to find wavs to live in peace
with each other," ' v^ i >c m yt;av.t;
Excerpts from a Speech by Ambassador Jessup on August 24, 1949
[Source: Department of State press release No. 643, August 23, 1949]
excerpts from "the FOREIGN POLICY OF A FREE DEM0CBACY"-ADDRESS MADE BY
AMBASSADOR JI^.SSUP AT THE GOLDEN JUBILEE NATIONAL CONVENTION OF VETERANS
OF FOREIGN WARS, MIAMI, AUGUST 24, 1049 Vh.lh.KANS
peoples*." * ^^^'^^ *^^ ^*^^''^' ^'^^«"' ""^'^ d" n*'t want more territory or subject
^f"* t • *i '^l^^ Soviet I^nion refuses to cooperate in imiiroving the welfare
or mankind and in insuring international peace and security "
"This opposition is not only obstructive but aggressively so. It not only is
a challenge to the beliefs and aspirations of the free peoples but al?o a thfeat
to their security and welfare. It is a challenge that must taken up! a threat
cafm derrmfnS.""' ^'"" ^^ "^ ^^^^^"^^ '"^^ ^^^^^--- ^^^^ ^« "-^^ ?-
cit\Z\ZJ!^rif^^'f ''^'I^^V^^^flff^^.that many of the actions and much of the effort
ot the I nitPd States m international affairs in recent months have been directed
toward countering the clear threat to ourselves and other free peoples We
"Thrr' V'^ ^l"T ^^herwise without betraying all that we stand fon"
ihe Lnited States has never been afraid to face the future Times of neace
dirf nT^H^r^t '' 7!'' "' ''''''' '' ^^"^^'^ ='"'^ ^'^''''^ "^-^ forethought If w|
lil^llv to r^.-?i 7h ' ^^'''^' r ^'''"^'^ ^^ ^^"'^ 'i'^^^y to reach the goal and lesl
Si.andoc ne thff'"' T^'" /^^'^ ^'^ °^''^^*^- ^t i« Communist, and not
Ameru an doctune, that enmity and war are inevitable.
1
238 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION |
..consistent wit. our.^^^^::^^:^:^^,^^ SZtemrtlTt^e
proposals us a mere propaganda maneuver ^J^^l^ff^^'^^^^,^^ Soviet Union is
"One of the plain facts ^^,f ^, P[,f,^f .tfen^h It wS the strength of the
contemptuous of weal^ness but ^^spects stren tn it ^ ^^^^ to make
west which led the Soviet Union to abandon tlieBei in d^^ock ^^
at least some moves toward agreement ntie ^^^/^^ e tna.^o ^.^^ ^^^ ^^^^^
Foreign Ministers in Pans 9^ i I^tv^ of Ni it-irv n^.wer • and of calm con-
peoples of the world ; of industnal P^;?;^ ', «/^^"^\^ |;;'o\u la cef ul foreign policy.
-^^1 ^^^:ve;^^a^ -^iS^iri^^ SirSn
^S^USfll^ B^rX^S^de^M^e^ ^i^Lut to pay tribute to
the men who organized it and ope^^^^^^^^ the organization of a Western
"Then there was J^e steady P^o.i ess to^^ ^^^ ^^^ ^^ ^.^^^^^^^
^::S:::v:^K^r!l!l^^'^^ii^ ^tites was a most Intent factor.
?haUs\auniUe must preserve, strengthe.^^^^^^^^^ ^^^.^^ ^^
"We have other friends and alhes for Pe^ce m all pans or u e
are cfosely bound to our good neighbors scnitlj^ of the R^^ ^a^_
formalized that unity in ^he defensive pact of Rode janem ^^^^^ ^.^_
eluded within the fi'^mework of the United Jsation^^ .^ ^^^
*""Sidose associations are no, ami ™'--"\''f, '>---;' ^^.f^ Wei Zt
;„otat,on .-f'-^ovlet union be^evesu, .at „ e,,^;, as ^j|Jl^'|-i,^^Jf„,t^, „.
:iS;V;ose^?,t«t/e;fef:a^e.esoW^^^^
are not trying to conquer Russia. We aie nor inai^ o-overnment will
coming It. I; « " J wf.nX „e -irins the most significant. We will not hesitate
}:i„''whr;rnec«sa,'; ;o''l"lp'he'free natioL preserve their independence
and integrity."
Excerpts From a Speech by Ambassador Jessup on September 6, 1949
[Source: Department of State press release No. 674, September 5, 1949]
FXCFRFFS FROM "THE CONQrERING MARCH OE AN IDEA," ADDRESS D^I^IVEBED BT
iMBASSrDOR JESSUP TO JhE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION, ST. LOnS, SEPTEMBEB
6, 1949
„a;^,s'LSiS:?j=n::z'^siirh^t^::nff^i;s^
sieved in imposing the power of their small elite governing class.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVEISTIGATION 239
"On tho oth^T liaiul. in conutrios sliroiulcd liy an iron cnrtain, or we may well
say curtained by an iron shroud, it is not news tliat an individual is doi)rlved
of life or liberty, is imprisoned and tortured. This is not novel; it is normal to
tlieir unhaiipy way of life. In that way of life the individual is nothing; the
state, embodied in a small rulinsr c-li(iue. is everything. Even if an atrocity were
news in our sense of the term, it could not be printed in those countries because
there is no free press. These denials of the inherent rights of the l)nnian being
reach the press only when they pierce the veil and reach the free world outside."
Excerpts From Statement by Ambassador Jessup in CojrMiTTEE One on
November 2S, 1949, Concerning China
[Source: United States Delegation press release No. 757, November 27, 1949]
EXCERPTS FROM STATEMENT IN THE POLITICAL COMMITTEE OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY,
NOVEMBER 28, 1949, SUB.TECT : CHINA
A cliarge by one member of the United Nations that another member is violat-
ing both a treaty and the Charter of the United Nations is a matter of serious
concern to us all. This is particularly true in the present case because the
alleged violation includes the charge of assisting in attempting the violent over-
throw of a recognized government; and, most of all. because both China and
the Soviet Union, as permanent members of the Security Council, are pledged
to fulfill special responsibilities in maintainng international peace and security.
A due regard for the normal deliberative processes of the United Nations as
well as for the opinion of the world community would have dictated that the
member against which the charges have been leveled should make some response
to them and should place its side of the case before this committee. We regret
that it has not seen fit to do so and that the Soviet delegation and also the dele-
gations of other eastern European states have refused to participate in the
consideration of this case.
Equally .serious although not equally well documented charges were made in
this As.sembly by the U. S. S. R. against the United States and United Kingdom in
the discussion of the resolution on the essentials of peace just concluded in this
committee. Both my delegation and that of the United Kingdom not only voted
in favor of placing that item on the agenda for discussion and hearing but took
their full part in the debate in answering the charges of the Soviet Union. In
this we were fulfilling our duty to the United Nations in helping to make the
Assembly, as Secretary of State Acheson in his opening speech in the Assembly
urged that it should be. "a forum in which the international public interest can
be fully expressed" through the participation of all members. Had we not done
so — had we adopted the Soviet tactics and refused to participate — it is not diffi-
cult to imagine the inferences which the Soviet delegation would have drawn
as to the truth of those charges made against us.
Unfortunately, the members of the United Nations must recall previous in-
stances in which the Soviet Union adopted the same procedure of refusing to
participate when an item which it regarded as unpleasant or disagreeable to it
was brought up for consideration.
The United States cannot but deplore this selective participation in the work
of the United Nations. Such an attitude seems the more regrettable when viewed
in the light of the overwhelming judgment of this committee given only last
Friday that one of "the essentials of peace" is full participation In this Organ-
ization, a judgment expressed by the terms of the resolution in a specific call
upon "every member to participate fully in the work of the United Nations."
The Soviet" delegation, it will be recalled, explained its vote of absention on
this provision on the ground that it was already binding upon all members by the
terms of the Charter.
*******
During the past few weeks this Committee has been engaged in a sobering
discnssion of what constitutes the essentials of peace. Although the debate was
initiated by the Soviet Union through an attack upon the western powers, the
discussion soon became focused, as every consideration of the requirements of
peace necessarily must, on the foreign policies and measures of the Soviet Union
itself. In that debate the representatives of countries from all areas of the
world, including one courageous example from eastern Europe itself, voiced the
same basic concern and urged the same basic solution — the concern arising from
240 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INYESTIGATION
what the distinguished delegate of Brazil termed the "unbridled imperialistic
encroachments" of the Soviet Union, and the solution to be found in the fulfill-
ment in good faith of the pledges and principles of the Charter.
The general charges made against the policies and activities of the U. S. S. R.
in that debate find a further specific application in the complaint which the
Chinese delegation has now laid before us. Although these charges focus upon
one geographic area, the fundamental problem is the same. It is a problem of
maintaining an independent, unified, and free country against what are charged
to be aggressive encroachments of a foreign power.
Ml ***** *
At the time of the Russian occupation of Manchuria at the turn of the present
century, the United States, in a note sent to the Russians and to other interested
governments, exerted its influence to maintain "China's territorial and admin-
istrative entity." Shortly thereafter Russian pressure for a privileged position
in Manchuria "brought a similar response from my Government. In the succeed-
ing years in the clashes between competing Russian and Japanese imperialisms
in north China, the United States sought repeatedly to establish respect for
China's integrity as the standard of conduct in the relations of these and all other
countries with China.
*******
United States aid to China during the last war and United States efforts
in the postwar period, to bring about internal peace and to end the civil war,
are well Ivuown. So, too, is United States insistence over Soviet objection that
China be included as one of the great powers in the prosecution of the war and
tlie oriianizaticm of peace— leading to her role as one of the sponsoring powers
of the United Nations at San Francisco, and one of the permanent members of
the Security Council.
The continuing concern of my Government for the independence of China was
recently reflected in an official statement issued August 5, calling attention to
dangers of Soviet Russian imperialism in the Far East, reaffirming the basic
principles which have traditionally guided United States policy and emphasizing
the opposition of the United States to the "subjection of China to any foreign
power" and to its "dismemberment by any foreign power, whether by open or
clandestine means."
*******
The evidence presented by the representative of China, and other reports that
have come to the attention of my Government, raise most serious questions as
to whether certain provisions of the Yalta agreement have in fact lieen carried
out properly and in good faith by the Soviet Union during the last 4 years.
Thr(^e months ago my Government officially called attention to the fact that Soviet
Russian demands upon the Chinese Government in connection with the negotia-
tion of the Sino-Soviet Treaty of 1945 exceeded the provisions of the Yalta
agreement. Some of the evidence and of the reports create grave cause for con-
cern that groundwork is in fact once again being laid for a further Russian
attempt to dismember China.
* * « * * * *
The United Nations must be alert to see that the domination of China by one
totalitarian power has not been displaced only to make way for the subjugation
of that conntrv to any other imperialism. The common efforts of the United
Nations in rescuing China and Japan from the grasp of imperialist and mili-
tarist power must not be nullified by acquiescence in new imperialist conquest by
more subtle devices than outright war.
I
Excerpts From Speech by Ambassador Jessup, November 28, 1949
[Source- Press release No. 758 of the United States Delegation to the General Assembly,
dated November 28, 1049]
EXCERPT FROM REMARKS OF AMBASSADOR JESSUP BEFORE THE ANNUAL DINNER OF THE
ENGLISH-SPEAKING UNION, HOTEL WALDORF-ASTORIA, NEW YORK, NOVEMBER 29,
1949
"Because Soviet Russia has embarked upon the new international Communist
imperialism, there is a tendency among cynics today to say that while we have
fought and won a war the victory has availed us nothing. It is the common
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 241
phrase that we are 'losing the peace.' Our freedom is not yet secure. But had
we not won the war we would not be in a position today to carry on our fight
to make freedom tlie common property of all mankind."
• EXCERPT FROM STATEMENT BY AMBASSADOR JESSlTP IN COMMITTEE ONE OF THE GEN-
ERAL ASSEMBLY, ON THE CHINESE SITUATION, DECEMBER 6, 1949
[Source: United States Delegation press release No. 771, December 6, 1949]
* * I hope, Mr. Chairman, it will be crystal clear that the United States
policy is against imperialism everywhere. We flatly reject it for ourselves and
we condemn it when practiced by any other state. We condemn it specifically
as revealed in the Soviet-Russian continuation of Tsarist-Russian imperialism
in the Far East. <^ur concern is that China, India, and all Asia be safeguarded
airainst Soviet Itussia of any other aggression.
We believe that the joint resolution which we have cosponsored, supplemented
by the Pliilippine amendment to the three-power resolution, is the most effec-
tive contribution the United Nations at this stage can make toward accomplish-
ing this purpose. Furthermore. Mr. Chairman, we are certain that the adoption
of such resolutions on the part of this committee would not be misunderstood
by the representatives of the cominform states. It is true that they have re-
mained silent in this committee during the current debate, but they have listened
to all our discussions and they must therefore understand without any mis-
understanding that the occasion of the joint draft resolution which my delega-
ion has had the honor to cosponsor. is Soviet Russian action in the Far East
which raises acute fears for the safety, independent, and integrity of China.
Those of us, Mr. Chairman, who share those fears should unite our voices and
our acts.
Text of Statement by Ambassador Jessup to the Foi'rth General Assembly,
Plenary Session, December 7, 1949
[Source: United Nations, official records, General Assembly (Plenary, December 9, 1949;
A/PV.272) 131-151]
Mr. .Tessit (United States of America). One thing whii'h f;riu)d out clearly in
the deiiates in the First Committee on the item which now engages our attention
was the strong friendship of the overwhelming majority of nations for China and
their concern for its welfare and the welfare of the people of China. Those debates
also revealed the determination of the overwhelming majority of the delegations
represented, as shown in the adoption of the resolution on the promotion of the
stability of international relations in the Far East, to do their [Jart to maintain
China's integrity and independence.
In sliari> contrast to that attitude of the vast majority of the delegations in the
First Committee was the attitude of the delegation of the Soviet Union and of
the .small group' of delegations following its lead. The attitude of those delega-
tions was the direct opposite of that which I have described. That attitude
strengthens the justified suspicions of other nations regarding the Soviet policy
and intentions toward China. That attitude revealed especially two things:
First, a callous disregard for the interests of China and the Chinese people ; and
secondly, a renewed indication of the most regrettable Soviet unwillingness to
co-operate in the work of the United Nations and to carry into effect the prin-
ciples of onr Charter. I think it is appropi'iate to review the actions of the dele-
gation of the Soviet Union on the item which we are now considering.
The first action which it took was to oppose the placing of this item on the
agenda, thus seeking to deprive the General Assembly of an opportunity even to
study the matter. The second action, which it has repeated today, was an attempt
to deny the right of the duly accredited representative of China to speak in the
General Assembly. I think it has been the experience of all of us that the delega-
tion of the Soviet Union is not unaware of the existence of the rules of procedure
of the General Assembly. It has, on frequent occasions, invoked those niles.
If it had chosen, on this occasion, to abide by our rules of procedure, it would
have found in rule 2."> the exact way in which this T)oint might have been raised in
a regular fashion. It would have found in ride 25 that :
"Any representative to whose admission a Member has made objection shall be
seated provisionally with the same rights as other representatives, until the
242 STATE D!EPART]VIE]SrT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
Credentials Committee has reported and the General Assembly has given its de-
cision."
The Soviet Union did not choose to follow the procedure laid down in our rules.
In the third place, the Soviet Union has failed to respond to the expressed
willingness of the Chinese delegation to refer certain questions involved in this
case to the International Court of Justice. In the fourth place, the Soviet Union |
refused to participate in the debates in the First Committee and, this afternoon,
has said that it refuses to participate in the debates in this plenary meeting of
the General Assembly.
I claim no special virtue for the policy of my Government, but I cite examples
as the normal attitude of most Members of the United Nations. I refer to the
question of willingness to discuss items on the agenda.
The Soviet Union placed on the agenda an item containing slanderous attacks
upon the United Kingdom and the United States. Those attacks, the charges
made therein, were repudiated, after full discussion, by a vote of fifty-three
Members of this Assembly. But, in the first instance, when we were asked to
consider placing this item on the agenda, our delegation and the delegation of
the United Kingdom made no ob.1ection to the consideration of the item, because
we believe that this is the forum in which charges, no matter how unfounded^
should be discussed.
I would also say that my Government has not been afraid to have the record
of United States policy in China in recent years examined by the world. The
official United States publication telling this story was referred to by Mr. Vyshin-
sky himself, who stated that its frankness must be admired. If the Soviet
Union admires frankness and open discussion of national policies, why does
it not practice frankness? Why does it not publish or produce before the
General Assembly the text of the Barter Agreement which the representative
of China reported that the Soviet Union had concluded with the local authorities
in Manchuria, an Agreement under which the Soviet Union sought an arrange-
ment to take away from the people of China the food and other products
of Manchuria which are essential to Chinese recovery? Why does it not pub-
lish or produce before the General Assembly the text of the reported monopolistic
agreement which it has concluded for the exploitation of the resources of Man-
churia? Why does it not publish or produce before this Assembly the text of
the reported agreement under which it seeks to control, for fifty years, the
monopolistic exploitation of the natural resources of Sinkiang? Why does it not
publish or lay before us a record of any other such agreements for special rights
and privileges which it may now be seeking to obtain or which it has already
obtained in China?
If the Soviet Union had not been afraid to publish the facts concerning its
policies and practices in the Far East, we could have had a basis on which to
decide whether or not we are mistaken in our well-founded conclusions that
the Soviet Russian policy in China today is part of a continuous story, a story
which began in the days of Tsarist Russian imiTerialisra and which still is
characterized by the search for special monopolistic privileges, by encroach-
ments and by attempted dismemberment of China.
Let us look at the votes of the Soviet Union delegation on the resolutions which
came before the First Committee. The vote on the resolution to promote the
stability of international relations in the Far East is most revealing. When
this question was put to the vote, the Polish delegation— which, it is fair to
say, more often than not reflects the view of the Soviet Union delegation —
called for a separate vote on the title. And let me repeat the title : "to promote
the stability of international relations in the Far East". Five negative votes
were cast against the title. One can interpret those five negative votes only to
mean the opposition of five delegations to stability in the Far East. Perhaps we
should not be surprised, for such an attitude is indeed in accordance with their
communistic creed of promoting turmoil and unrest. The five negative votes
on the rest of the resolution to promote the stability of international relations
in the Far East must raise more questions in our minds :
Can it be that the Soviet Uni(m does not intend or wish to respect the political
independence of China? Can if be thU the Soviet Union does not intend or wish
to respect the right of the Cliinese p.'ople freely to choose their own political
institutions or to maintain a government independent of foreign control? Do
they not intend or wish to respect their treaties relating to China? Do they
not intend or wish to refrain from seeking spheres of influence or the creation
of puppet regimes, or from obtaining special monopoly rights in China?
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 243
These are the things which are set forth in this resolution which we call upon
all States to adopt. These are the principles which are opposed by the Soviet
Union delegation, and the four other delegations.
In my oi>enlng statement before the First Committee, I said that the failure
to endorse this resolution might well be interpreted as indicating an intention
to profit by the present situation in Cbina for purposes of imiierialist aggrandise-
ment. What other conclusion can the world draw from the fi . e votes cast against
these fundamental principles
Let us look on the allirmative side at the merits of this resolution. The very
fact of the Soviet opi;osition attests indeed to its importance. That opposition
is conclusive proof that this resolution is not, as one representative feared in
bis statement in the First Committee, a mere "song to the moon." The Soviet
opposition is proof that the Soviet Union understands perfectly that this reso-
lution, far from condoning the past actions of Soviet Russia in China, is oc-
casioned by those very actions and reflects the acute fears of the international
community of this Soviet Russian continuation of Czarist Russian imperialism
in the Far East. This resolution is addressed to the real root of the international
problem, to the real concern that the international community has regarding this
situation.
The representative of Chile pointed out in the First Committee that the General
Assembly is not now dealing with the question of the justice or injustice of the
civil strife now raging in China. This resolution does not seek to deal with that
issue. It does deal in an integral manner with the international aspects of this
problem. This resolution is constructive because it is forward-looking. While
it does not ignore the past, it does not content itself with a mere sifting of past
events. It is a clear statement of the principles to which all nations must adhere
at all times.
The second resolution which has been reported to the General Assembly from
the First Committee is one in regard to which I do not intend to rehearse the
discussions that took place in the Committee. These discussions have already
been referred to. It is clear that, in the course of those discussions, certain mis-
understandings aro.se among various delegations.
1 have listened with interest to the suggestion just advanced by the representa-
tive of Ecuador, proposing, on behalf of the three sponsors of the original resolu-
tion, a new amendment which would incorporate a certain additional thought in
their joint resolution. While it is true that this amendment does not go the
whole way to meet the difficulties to which we called attention in the First Com-
mittee, we do feel that it goes part of the way, and we shall accordinglv vote for
the resolution introduced by Cuba, Ecuador and I'eru if this amendment is
adopted and incorporated in it.
In my statement before the First Committee, I pointed out that the conscience
of the world has expressed itself in the past in multipartite declarations which
have played a real part in the history of China's strug-le for its integrity. The
reality of these declarations has been proved, even though from time to time they
have been flouted by aggressors. The enunciation by the Government of the
United States in 1900 of the policy of promoting the maintenance of the inde-
pendence and integrity of China .served as a restraining influence on the conduct
of all the pnwers in the ensuing years, despite the continuance of unsettled
conditions in China. These principles were written into the Nine Power Treaty
of 1!;)22, which the representative of China himself stated gave to his country
the opportunity for constructive development.
If the nations of the world had not, during the past fifty years, recorded these
self-denying ordinances the devouring waves of Russian and Japanese im-
perialism might well have totally engulfed China. The proper place today for
thereaflirmation of these principles is the General Assembly of the United
Nations. The vote in the First Committee shows that the conscience of the
world will again speak in the interests of China and the people of China.
I wish to point out also that the debate on the item which we are now con-
sidering is in reality a continuation of the debate which resulted in the adoption
of the resolution on essentials of peace by a vote of 53 Members of the United
>ations. The general charges made against the policies and activities of the
Soviet Union in that debate find a further specific application in the matter
we are now considering. Although our attention is now focussed upon one
geographic area, the fundamental problem is unchanged. It is the problem of
maintaining an independent, unified and free country against the aggressive
encroachments of a foreign power. The resolution on essentials of peace applies
to Lluua as weU as to all other parts of the world. That resolution and the
244 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
resolution which is now before us to promote the stability of international
relations in the Far East are closely linked. Together they constitute a code
of conduct regarding the Far East. The United States pledges itself to abide
by that code of conduct, and it expects all other nations to do likewise.
In joining with other delegations in sponsoring the resolution on the stability
of international relations in the Far East the paramount consideration of my
delegation and of my Government has been to promote the interests of the people
of China. This is not a new policy of the United States. The record shows
that this has consistently been our policy. That policy has received only one
challenge, and that challenge was made by Mr. Vyshinsky when he was seeking
to prevent the General Asssembly from discharging its duty to discuss this item
which had been placed on the agenda. Mr. Vyshinsky then charged that the
proposal of this item was instigated by the United States for imperialistic
rea.sons. It was not instigated by the United States. Moreover, the United
States, unlike the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, has no imperialistic
designs on China.
I wonder where are the evidences of United States imperialism in Cliina
which Mr. Vyshinsky may have had in mind. Surely they are not monopolistic
agreements of the type which the Soviet Union lias been concluding in China, for
the United States has neither sought nor obtained such rights. I do not hesitate
to say that the Chinese people will agree that there is nothing imiierialistic in
the continuation of our historic policy of aiding Chinese students and scholars
by the allocation in recent years of 200 million dollars for the programme of
exchanging students and teachers between the United States and China. I do
not think that the Chinese people believe that it was a sign of American im-
perialism to distribute some 400,000 tons of rice and 180,000 tons of wheat and
flour in Shanghai and Canton during the past two years. Nor will they maintain
that it was American imperialism which led to the supplying of cotton to keep
the textile mills of China in operation so that the workers would not be
unemployed and so that they would have wages with which to buy food and
clothing.
Charges of United States imperialism can hardly be levelled against the joint
Ignited States-Chinese rural reconstruction programme, which was launched in
1!)4S and continued as long as possible in Szechuan and Chekiang, to improve
rural living conditions, increase foreign output, and improve the social and
educational position of the Chinese farmer. We neither desire nor claim any
monopoly in extending help to the people of China ; we have not been alone in
extending help. But not only in the last year and a half, but on earlier occasions,
when the people of China were hungry the people of the United States have sent
food. The rice alone which we sent in 1048 and 1048 meant that 10,000,000
Chinese had their rice bowls filled daily during that period. In view of the vast
problems of that great population, what we have been able to do has been little
em. ugh. hut in view of current food shortages in China, I submit that it contrasts
favourably with the barter agreement recently concluded by the Soviet Union
with local authorities in Manchuria, under which food would be taken from the
rice howls of the Chinese people for shipment to the Soviet Union.
We shall not cease our efforts on behalf of the people of China, nor shall we
cease, in the field of international relations and through the United Nations, to
work for the real interests of China itself, for its independence and its integrity.
The draft resolution on the promotion of the establishment of international
relations in the Far Fast will unite the peoples of the free world in the promotion
of this connnon objective.
The PuKsiDEMT. The Chair proposes to close the list of speakers in ten minutes
from now.
Mr. Chaudluny, representative of Pakistan, will address the General Assembly
on the amendment.
Mr. CiiAUDHURY (Pakistan). AYhen the tripartite draft resolution was being
discussed in the First Committee my delegation abstained from voting for the
very simple reason that Ihe words, "that item," appearing in the operative part of
the draft resolution had considerably limited the scope of the problem It was
limited to the extent that the entire draft resolution appeared to be an outcome
of a prejudiced mind. But we greatly welcome the amendment which has now
been submitted, which focuses the attention on the four fundamental principles
that are contained in the five-power draft resolution reading as follows-
"1. To respect the political independence of China and to be guided bv the
principles of the United Nations in their relations with China •
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 245
"2. To respect the right of the people of China now and in the future to choose
freely their political institutions and to maintain a government independent of
foreign control ;
"3. To respect existing treaties relating to China ; and
"4. To refrain from (a) seeking to acquire spheres of influence or to create
foreign controlled regimes within tlie territory of China; (h) seeking to obtain
special rights or privileges witliin tlie territory of China."
Excerpts From Statement to the Press by Ambassador Jessup, Hong Kong,
January 18, 1950
[Source: Press statement attached as enclosure 1 to official communication from Consul
General Kankin to the Department of State, Honj? Kong No. 84, of January 31, 1950]
EXCERPTS FROM STATEMENT TO THE PRESS BY AMBASSADOR JESSUP, HONG KONG,
JANUARY 18, 1950
"I wish to make a statement regarding United States policy in Asia and
the whole Far p]ast. These principles have been stated officially many times,
but it is important that people throughout the world not lose siglit of them.
"First : The United States opposes the Communist theory and practice of
attempting to overthrow governments by violence or subversive action. We
shall continue to oppose that vicious theory and practice by i)eaceful means
throughout Asia and tliroughout tbe world.
"Second: We are opposed to imperialism in any form. We have always
firmly rejected it in our own policy, and we oppose it wherever practiced."
"The interest of the United States in the independence of the countries
of Asia is genuine and abiding. The history of tlie past 150 years proves this
statement. Within our economic capacity, a major factor in determining the
assistance we can render the people of Asia is the degree to which these peoples
are prepared to support governments of their own choosing in opposition to
Communist tyrainiy.
"The United States will continue to take its stand for freedom, because of
our conviction that there lies the true interest not only of the peoples of Asia
but also the United States and of all of the United Nations."
EXCERPTS FROM BROADCAST BY AMBASSADOR JESSUP OVER RADIO MALAYA, SINGAPORE,
FEBRUARY 6, 1950
[Source: United States Department of State Press Release No. FE. 50/36 ; February
6, 1950]
As a result 'Of these fundamental beliefs, we are firmly opposed to all sys-
tems of government which seek to enslave the individual or to subordinate him
to .some supposed overriding interest of the state. That is why we opposed
and will continue to oppose all forms of totalitarian dictatorship whether they
take the form of the Nazi or Fascist regimes of Eurofoe and of .Japan which
we and our allies defeated in the last war or v,-hether they take the form of
the current theories of communism.
Specifically, we are opposed to imperialism. By imperialism I mean the
policy of attempting to subject and exploit other peoples for one's own benefit.
Imperialism is thus the exact opposite of the policy which the United States
followed in training the people of the Philippines for self-government and of
granting them their full independence. It is the exact opposite of the policy
followed by the United Kingdom in granting independence to India, Pakistan,
Burma, and Ceylon and in developing here in Malaya a progressive program
toward nationhood. It is the exact opposite of the policy which the Nether-
lands followed in helping to establish the United States of Indonesia and which
France is following in perfecting the independence of Viet Nam, Cambodia, and
Laos.
On the other hand, the new form of imperialism which we see in the world
today is illustrated by the policy of the Comiuform, the international agency
of the Conuinmist Party, which insists that the peoples who are brougb.t under
its control are not entitled to express their own views but must? conform in
246 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY LNTVESTIGATTON
every respect to the decisions laid down in Moscow. The official public pro-
nouncements of the Communist leaders announce that nationalism in Asia is
to be encouraged only as a step on the road to the subjection of the peoples of
Asia to the alien rule of the Russian dictators who control the policies of the
Cominform.
* * * I have had the privilege of being one of the representatives of my
Government in many meetings of the United Nations. As the record proves
and as the experience of everyone who has attended such meetings testifies,
states which are closely with the Soviet Union must always take identical action
with the Soviet Union. There is no room in that system for the expression
of any separate point of view. The rigid control which exists over the in-
dividual in the Soviet-Russian system, which is the Communist system, ex-
tends also the relations of governments which form part of the Soviet bloc
and which are therefore naturally and properly known as satellites.
It is precisel.v because of this fundamental difference in the theory of the free
nations of the world and in the theory of the Soviet Union that many of the
actions taken liy the General Assembly of the United Nations are seen in
their true significance.
ExcEatPT From Speech by Ambassajdoe Jesstjp Over National Radio Station of
Thailand Delivered February 17, 1950
[Source : Original manuscript in files of Department of State]
excerpt from speech by ambassador JESSUP over national radio station OfF
THAILAND
What I should like to discuss briefly is one of the great problems which both
our countries face and which other free nations of the world face — the danger
that a hostile power, through subversion, through infiltration of disloyal ele-
m' nts, may seek to overthrow the government and to establish an alien rule
which will put an end to the independent existence of the state alfected. That is
the menace of international communism today and against that menace we
stand firm.
Excerpts From Statement to the Press by Ambassador Jessup at United
States Information Library, 54 Queensway, New Delhi, February 23, 1950
[Source : U. S. Department of State press release, February 23, 1950]
EXCERPTS FROM STATEMENT TO THE PRESS BY AMBASSADOR JESSUP AT UNITED STATES
INFORMATION LIBRARY, 54 QUEENSBURY, NEW DBXHI, FEBRUARY 23, 9150
Since the end of the Second World War, history has recorded the extension of
a new imperialism that has brought more than a dozen countries under the
domination of a single expanding power. The device used by this expanding
power in extending its imiierialism is to hold out the glittering promises of com-
munism as a beacon light for the rescue of peoples who are suffering from
economic underdevelopment or who are trying to remove the sha'kles of the
old traditional kinds of colonialism. However, where communism gains control,
it becomes immediately apparent that the people are not allowed to determine
their own future but must conform to a single policy laid down in Moscow.
* * * Communism is hostile to what the Asian people want to do and
what we want to help them to do — which is to develop the stability of their
new countries and to develop their resources and their technical skills so that
they are not subject to penetration, either through ignorance or distress or
because they succumb to the false promises of the Communists.
Ambassador Jessup. Thank you, sir.
Among the international matters with which I have been called
upon to deal for the United States are those of Korea, where the
efforts of the United Nations to unify and give independence to that
country encountered boycott and obstruction from the Soviet Union,
the lifting* of the Berlin blockade, in which I had the good fortune
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 247
to play a part, the attempts of the United Nations to preserve the
independence of China, and the disposition of the Italian colonies in
north Africa. Another case that I mio^ht mention is that of Indo-
nesia, wliere it has been the aim of the United States to encourage the
Indonesian national government, the government of w'hicli has shown
its ability to cope with Indonesian communism.
I should like at this point to read just a few sentences from a state-
ment which I nuide in Security Council of the United Nations on
January 1, 1949, on this question of Indonesia. I said at that time:
No one douhts that the Communists in Indonesia, like the Communists through-
out the world, are responsive to and act in accordance with instructions from
Moscow. The Communist revolt against the Government of President Soekarno
and Premier Hotta was. itself, an effort on the part of the Government of the
U. S. S. R. to overthrow the Indonesian Republic.
Furthermore, when the resumption of hostilities by the Netherlands Govern-
ment against the Indonesian Republic took place, the official Communist Party
line, as printed in the Communist press, instead of deploring this action, openly
gloated that it was a punishment for the Government of President Soekarno
and Premier Hotta, which had successfully put down a Communist revolt.
And, I said further :
But, the U. S. S. R. does not want an independent Indonesia, it wants an
Indonesia under the domination and control of a Communist minority, taking
its orders from Moscow. Anywhere in the world, when a Communist govern-
ment climbs in through the window, independence is kicked out of the door.
That is among the records which I 'have submitted for the com-
mittee, sir.
In these matters, as in others, the Soviet Union opposed the settle-
ments supported by the United States and other members of the
United Nations. I have defended the position of the United States
and fought the obstructive tactics of t'he Soviet Union and its Com-
munist satellites. It is not for me to judge whether I have done well.
I do assert that it cannot be denied that the record reveals complete
devotion to the interests of the United States and our way of life and
uncompromising hostility to international communism and all that it
stands for.
Although I believe, Mr. Chairman, I have made it clear from w'hat
I have already said, I wish to repeat categorically and without quali-
fication that I am not a Communist and never have been a Communist.
I am not and never have been a Communist sympathizer. I have
never knowingly supported or promoted any movement or organiza-
tion which I know had as its objective the furtherance of Communist
objectives. Although I cannot claim to have any detailed knowledge
of the process, I wholeheartedly support the efforts of those whose
official responsibility it is to see that Communists or Communist sym-
pathizers are kept out of our Government.
Mr. Chairman, as I have attempted conscientiously to review the
record of my activities, I have perhaps been prejudiced by by own
inner knowledge that Senator McCarthy's charges and insinuations
are utterly false. But I submit that any sincere person would have
concluded from a review of the record that it does not offer the slightest
iota of proof that I have "an unusual affinity for Communist causes."
I therefore conclude that Senator McCarthy's charges and insinua-
tions are not only false but utterly irresponsible and under the circum-
stances reveal a shocking disregard for the interests of our country.
68970 — 50 — pt. 1 17
248 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY LSTVESTIGATTON
Mr. Chairman, if these insinuations affected me alone, they would
perhaps not be a matter of any great importance, except to me, my
family, and my friends. But these insinuations, and the manner in
which they were put forward, have had an effect upon 150,000,000
Americans and all the people in the world who are striving for peace.
I know I do not have to tell the members of this committee of the
serious situation which exists in the world today. You know that the
stakes are high. The United States is in the midst of a struggle for
peace. We are opposed by the efforts of a diabolically clever and well-
organized Communist organization which is seeking to destroy our
democracy. If we are to succeed in our struggle, we must forego all
partisanship and all partisan political adventures. If we are to suc-
ceed, we must show to our friends in the free world that we are not
divided in our counsels, but that we are united in our determination to
promote the cause of peace and to pursue the wisest policy which our
united genius can devise. If we are to succeed, we must all dedicate
ourselves to the cause of peace with devotion and unity of purpose.
For my part, that is my one and only thought.
Thank you.
Senator Tydings. Thank you. Dr. Jessup.
(Loud applause.)
Senator Tydings. Please, no demonstration.
Any questions. Senator Hickenlooper ?
Senator Hickenlooper. Mr. Chairman, I have some questions that
I feel I should ask Mr. Jessup ; but again, I want to make my position
clear.
Over a week ago, Senator McCarthy publicly named nine names
and at that time I requested that we immediately get the files so we
would have whatever information, in fairness to the witnesses, or to
the people who were named, and in fairness to this committee — that
we immediately get the files on those nine people.
So far as I know, those files have not been secured. I have had no
opportunity to look into the rounded-out information which may
affect any of these people, and therefore I feel that any questions of
mine, at this time, are utterly witliout any foundation of extensive
knowledge of the allegations, or information, and I again renew my
request that this committee do what the Senate ordered it to do, and
that is, to secure these files.
I think an inexcusable delay has occurred in the securing of the files
of the nine people who are named, not only in the interest of good
investigation, but in the interest of the people who have been named,
themselves.
Now, I also received a copy of a letter from Senator McCarthy,
delivered by hand to my office just a few moments ago, in which he
requested that he, as the moving party in this accusation, be allowed
to confront the witness and to examine him and question him.
Has any action been taken on that, Mr. Chairman ?
Senator Tydings. It would be pretty hard to take action on the last
request, because it did not reach me until about 10 minutes after 10
this morning; and, the chairman is not making policy for this com-
mittee. He has to have all five members present and ascertain what
their wishes are.
The matter will be laid before the committee at the earliest possible
moment when a meeting can be had.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 249
Now, as \ong as we are talking about a list of names, the only
detailed charge against Mr. Jessup that I recall is "that he has an
unusual affinity for Connnunist causes."
There has been no supporting data offered by any witness to sub-
stantiate that charge.
In the second place, we are here because that is the only evidence
that has been brought before this committee up to now concerning
Dr. Jessup.
In the third place, on the Senate floor on the 20th of February 1950^
over a month ago, over 4 weeks ago. Senator McCarthy outlined by
number the cases of 81 individuals whom he asked the Senate com-
mittee to investigate. The individuals were not named. They were
designated by number.
Up to this minute, none of those 81 names has been furnished by
Senator McCarthy or anybody else, and how we can get the files of
someone whose name we do not know is a matter of great conjecture
to the chairman, as it must be to the other members of this committee.
I have asked repeatedly, publicly and privately and by letter, for
these 81 names ; and, I have not yet received an answer to my letter,
except a telephone conversation which I had with the Senator when
he received my letter of request ; to wit, that they would be furnished
today, Monday. Up to the present time, they have not come in my
office, as the result of an inquiry I just made before I came up here^
to make sure that that was the case.
Now, the nine names, of which Dr. Jessup, I believe, was one, were
submitted only about 10 days ago. It is a matter of some difficulty
for me to realize why we could get nine names submitted 9 days
ago in public, and could not get the 81 names submitted almost a
month ago; and, the names of the nine, as I understand it, are at
least for the most part, if not entirely, not names that were mentioned
in the debate in the Senate which caused us to be appointed and con-
duct this investigation.
Now, as to the files : I have asked the State Department to turn over
the files to us in the cases that have been mentioned. I have likewise
had a brief made of our rights under subpena to obtain those files.
The State Department has indicated a willingness to turn over these
files, but as it will create a precedent they are moving very cautiously
so that in other instances what is done here may not be seized upon, at
the Avhim of everyone to get to the files in the future; and, if the
committee will bear with me just a moment, I would like at this point
to ^ive some information about these files, so that there will be fuller
understanding of the task of the committee, and why I have been
proceeding in the manner outlined.
As I said, I had looked up and had prepared our authority to
proceed to obtain these files, and I will now read the history of the
actions by numerous executives dealing with files and similar informa-
tion that had been requested by the Congress.
Who are the authorities that have established the soundness of the
constitutional doctrine that the legislative branch may not subpena.
the executive branch?
I. Presidents who established this doctrine in the first century of
our national existence :
1796. George Washington refused papers to the House (Richardson,
Messages and Papei-s of the Presidents, vol. I, pp. 194, 19G — hereafter
cited simply as Richardson).
250 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
In 1825, James Monroe refused papers to the House (reported in
Eichardson, vol. 2, p. 278). , o ^ / 4. a -^
In 1833, Andrew Jackson refused papers to the feenate (reported m
Richardson, vol. 3, p. 36). ,
In 1835, Andrew Jackson refused papers to the Senate (reported
inKicharclson, vol. 3, pp. 132andl33).
In 1843, John Tyler refused papers to the House (reported m
Richardson, vol. 4, pp. 105 and 106, and 221 and 223) .
In 1886, Grover Cleveland supported his Attorney Generals re-
fusal to comply with Senate resolution calling for papers.
II. Quotations of views expressed by various Presidents who served
prior to the current period :
George Washington : * * * As it is essential to tbe due administration of
the Government that the boundaries fixed by the Constitution between the dif-
ferent deprtments should be preserved, a just regard to the Constitution and
to the duty of my office * * * forbids a compliance with your request.
(Reported by Richardson in vol. 1, pp. 194 and 196.)
George Washington's Farewell Address ; * * * The habits of thinking in
a free ?ountn slSd Lspire caution in those entrusted with its administration
to coniSe themselves within their respective constitutiona ^P ^^;^^^' ^r !:ie
the exercise of the powers of one departmen to encroach ^ 7, ^^^^^^^T^^ J^'JI
spirit of encroachment tends to consolidate the powers of all he depaiU^
in one, and thus to create, whatever the form of govemment, a leal
despotism * * *.
(Richardson, vol. 1, p. 239.)
°'rmv'hl;SS!a compliance with tbe resolution wi,lch has been transmittea
4- ^,;^i,i 1 hP 1 surrender of duties and powers which the Constitution nas
conTerr^reiau'sive >n the Executive ; and! therefore, such compliance cannot
be maie by me nor by the heads of departments by my direction.
^"^iSTn^ai^ ??f/,"his Presidency, and before his Chief
Justiceship :
The President is required by the Constitution from Uine to time to ^ve^to
Congress information on me state of the union j^XeJufidential in-
enable Congress or either House of CoiW e,^^ to eiicii i discharge
S^^S^Sl^iJ;S,lfr^^s^oJ^rSe^&iosure J such informaUon
prudent or in the public interest.
(The Chief Magistrate, published in 1969, at p. 129.) .
TTT The views of a congressional committee: in lb<J, ttie ±iouse
Judiciary Committee reported to.the House, supporting the constitu-
tional doctrine here under discussion, saying :
and records of the House or Se^^^^^^^^^ * documents might easily be a very
This mischief of tbe House ^^^t^"' *«^ ^ this point. It clearly cannot
S'the^HouL or M.^^ZS.e""^*^ ' tL bead of the executive depart-
ment * * * must be the judge * * *.
IV Attorneys General have consistently taken this view and so
advised Houses of Congress and the President.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVEISTIGATION 251
The following include distinguished holders of the chief legal posi-
tion in the Government, including Republicans of stature, and two
l3emocrats of conservative reputation, one of them (McKeynolds of
Tennessee) subsequently a Justice of the Supi'eme Court, and the other
(Gregory of Texas) one of the greatest holders of that office through-
out the Nation's history particularly for his support of the Consti-
tution and the American political system.
In 1901, Attorney General Knox*, in a communication to the House
of April 27, dealt with this point.
In 1908, Charles J. Bonaparte, Attorney General under Theodore
Roosevelt, to the House on A])ril loth dealt with this point.
In 1912. Attorney General Wickersham, in a communication to the
House dated ISIarch 18th.
In 1914, McReynolds to the President, in a communication dated
August 28th.
In 1915, Gregory to the Senate, in a communication dated February
23d.
In 1926, Attorney General Sargent, in the Coolidge Cabniet, to the
House Judiciary Committee, in a communication dated June 8th.
The above citations, besides appearing in the Congressional Record
and committee hearings, appear in Opinions of the Attorney General,
volume 40, pages 47 and 48.
V. Court discussion of the separation of powers :
(1) The United States Supreme Court, in Kilhourn v. Thompson
(103U.S. 169, 190), said:
It is believed to be one of the chief mei'its of the American system of written
constitutional law that all the powers entrusted to Government, whether State
or national, are divided into the three grand departments — the executive, the
legislative, and the judicial — that the functions appropriate to each of these
branches of Government shall be vested in a separate body of public servants,
and that the perfection of the system requires that the lines which separate and
divide these departments shall be bi-oadly and clearly defined. It is also essen-
tial to the successful working of this system that the persons entrusted with
power in any one of these branches shall not be permitted to encroach upon the
powers confided to the others, but that each shall by the law of its creation be
limited to the exercise of the powers appropriate to its own department and no
other.
(2) State" courts agree. For example, Pennsylvania court in
Apfeal of Hartranft (85 Pa. 433, 445) , reading :
* * * We had better at the outstart recognize the fact that the executive
department is a coordinate branch of the Government with power to judge what
should or should not be done, within its own department, and what of its own
doings and communications should or should not be kept secret, and that with
it, in the exercise of these constitutional powers, the courts have no more right
to interfere than has the executive, under like conditions, to interfere with the
courts.
VI. Other court authorities supporting the constitutional doctrine
are as follows :
Marbury v. Madison — these are mostly Supreme Court cases — re-
ported in 1 Cranch 137, 1G9.
Totten v. United States, reported in 92 U. S. 105.
Vogel V. Gniaz, reported in 110 U. S. 311.
In reference to Quarles and Butler, 158 U. S. 532.
Boshe V. Cominffore, 177 U. S. 459.
In reference to Huttman, 70 Fed. 699.
252 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
In reference to Lamherton^ 124 Fed. 446
In reference to Valecia Condensed Milk Co.^ 240 Fed. 310.
Elrod V. Moss, 278 Fed. 123.
Arnstein v. United States, 296 Fed. 946.
Gray v. Pentland, 2 Sergeant & Rawle's (Pa.) 23 and 28.
Thompson v. German Y alley Railroad Co., 22 New Jersey Equity
Worthington v. Scrihner, 109 Mass. 487.
2 Burr Trials, 533-536.
And, 25 Opinions of the Atorney General 326.
VII. American writers on constitutional law who explain and
approve the above doctrine :
3 Willoughby, the Constitutional Law of the United States (1929),
pages 1488, and so forth.
Mason, Congressional Demands upon the Executive for Informa-
tion. Five papers of the American Historical Association (1891),
page 33.
Eberling, Congressional Investigations (1928), page 282.
Finley and Sanderson, the American Executive and Executive,
Methods (1908) , pages 199 and 200, and 246 to 265.
Then there are others that I will not put in the record at th^
moment.
In view of this opinion which I have had for sometime, which I
obtained shortly after my appointment, I wanted to get all of these
records; and, realizing that the road to get them by force or by
subpena might be a stormy and a fruitless one, I have been trying
to get the records without having a controversy over them.
The State Depai'tment, I believe, is willing to give me these records.
I shall be disappointed if I do not get them. It will be contrary to
the indications I have so far received; but I do realize that in the
face of the precedents which support, in my opinion, the right of the
Executive to withhold them, should he so desire, that we had better
proceed in the manner best calculated to put the files in our hands,
and I am very hopeful that before very many days go by, I hope today
or tomorrow, or not later than Wedesday as a matter of conjecture,
we will have access to the files and can go ahead with them.
However, I want the public to know, and the committee to know,
that it will be a courtesy extended to us, and contrary to the legal
precedents from George Washington down to date, if we do get them.
Senator McMahon. Mr. Chairman, I just wish to make this obser-
vation: That you may have been informing the public as to the law
or the precedents but you were not informing any member of this com-
mittee, including the Senator from Iowa, as to the precedents.
Senator Tydings. I believed that I ought to make this statement
that I have because I want to get the files. I want the files of every
case, every person or number that has been mentioned. There were
81 mentioned a month ago, and I hope we will get those today, together
with all others, and I want to arrange at some place and time where
we can look at these files and see whether these accusations and charges
are true or false, but I do want the public to know — I do not believe
I have to tell the committee; there are good lawyers here — that the
precedents all seem, in my opinion, to favor the President's right to
withhold them should he see fit. I have reason to believe we will get
STATE DEPARTMENT ElVIPLOYEE LOYALTY INVEISTIGATION 253
these files, but we won't get tliem if we are going at it the wrong way.
I am trying to^et resuks and not get into a controversy with the execu-
tive department.
Senator Hickenlooper. The brief which the chairman has read has
been, I think, discussed repeatedly on the floor of the Senate. These
alleged precedents and others have been the subjects of discussions
from time to time in the past, even in the short time that I have been
a Member of the Senate.
Nevertheless the Senate, in adopting its resolution, and in view of
the fact that these have been thoroughly discussed and threshed out
with various opinions on the floor of the Senate, directed this sub-
committee as follows in the last sentence of the resolution, Senate
Resolution 231 :
In the conduct of this study and investigation, the committee is directed to pro-
cure by subiiena and examine the complete loyalty and employment tiles and rec-
ords of all the Government employees in the Department of State and such other
agencies against whom charges have been heard.
Do I take it. Mr. Chairman, that this subcommittee of the Commit-
tee on Foreign Relations is setting itself up as a judicial body to inter-
pret the law and to overrule the direct mandate of the Senate of the
United States to do this act ?
Senator Tydings. Will you let me answer that ? I was not present
when this resolution was passed. After it had been passed and my
committee had been appointed, I called to the attention of the full
Foreign Relations Committee a great many ambiguities in the resolu-
tion, in my o]iinion. and I called this to the attention of the Senate
on the floor. For example, if we want to go by the resolution, and stick
strictly to it, as my colleague from Iowa seems to indicate woidd be
wise, then the only thing we can investigate is the following :
is authorized and directed to conduct a full and complete study and investigation
as to whether persons who are disloyal to the United States are or have been
employed by the Department of State.
So far as the present witness before us is concerned, he has been
charged with having an affinity for Communist causes. There has
been no charge, other than that, that he has been disloyal to the United
States. So," unless a charge is made that he is disloyal to the Uuited
States, if we are going to stick to this resolution and are going to be
technical with all parts of it, I hardly know how to proceed with
this witness.
Now I will in due time, to carry out the wishes of the Senate, should
entreaties and requests to get the files fail, issue a subpena, although
my face, to be frank, will be a little red when I do it because I know
in advance we have no power to enforce it. Nevertheless, I shi?,ll be
true to the commitment which the Senate enforces upon the commit-
tee. But I hope, too, if we are going to be that strict about interpret-
ing this resolution, that we will not forget that our job is to investigate
whether i)ersons who are disloyal to tlie United States have been em-
ployed by the Department of State, and in the latter part of the same
resolution which Senator Hickenlooper just read, I will read that
whole sentence :
In the conduct of this study and investigation, the committee is directed to
procure by subpena and examine the complete loyalty and employment files in
the Depaitment of State and such other agencies against whom charges have
been heard.
254 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY ESTVESTIGATION
Now Senator McCarthy, in his testimony under oath on the stand,
said he was not making charges. He said he was only giving us in-
formation. Should we investigate all of the information that comes
before us regardless of whether it contains a charge or not? For,
in one case I have been handed 25 names with not even one sentence
about any of them to show what the charge was.
If we are going to be technical, I would be delighted to have my
friend from Iowa right here and now tell me what he thinks the scope
of this investigation should be as outlined by the resolution which
brings us into being.
Senator Hickenlooper. I will be delighted to tell the Senator that
I think long since we should have secured the files of the nine people
who have been specifically and publicly mentioned ; that we have de-
layed overlong; that we have not been zealous or diligent in getting
those files, and that any number of things covdd happen to those files.
I do not say that they will or that they have happened. But this de-
lay is certainly mysterious to me, and I see no reason why we should
not immediately have got hold of the files, all of the files, on the nine
people mentioned, in their interest as well as in the interest of expedi-
tious investigation. That is one step, and if we take that we will
occupy our time for a while and we will be getting at the heart and
meat of this matter.
Senator Ttuings. Should we investigate people against whom no
charges have been filed ?
Senator Hickenlooper. I think it is entirely within the committee
to determine what people in the State Department should be investi-
gated. If this is to be a highly technical investigation, with the re-
fusal of this committee to look into specific cases as well as collateral
cases, then it will be a fruitless investigation, as anyone can see.
Senator Tydings. We cannot subpena any of the records except for
the files of people against whom charges have been heard. That is
what the resolution says.
Senator Hickenlooper. There haA^^e been nine specifically men-
tioned, and if I understand the English language there have been some
definite charges made against these people, and we have made no
progress so far as I know in the acquisition of the files on these spe-
cific nine people. There is a start for us.
Senator Tydings. The resolution says:
In the conduct of this study and investigation the committee is directed to
procure by subpena
Senator Hickenlooper. That's plain.
Senator Tydings (continuing) :
and examine the complete loyalty files and records of all employees against
whom charges have been heard.
With regard to Mr. Jessup, who comes before us this morning,
the sole charge so far that I have heard is that he has an affinity for
Communist organizations. I suppose that would be a charge. The
Chairman said on the floor of the Senate, in answer to an interrogation
I think from Senator Knowland, that he would extend the widest
measure of interpretation to this resolution, and that he will do. So
even the 25 cases against whom no charge has been made, being only
a list of names which Senator McCarthy gave me, without a line or
a syllable to tell us what the charge is, I have already asked for the
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 255
records on, and I happen to know that the State Department at this
very moment is trying to work out a procedure so that we can see the
records. Their fear is that if they give them up now, every time in
tlie future that somebody wuuts to use them, we will assume for pur-
poses that best suit the individual so that they can be reviewed, this
will be used as a precedent. There has been no breach of this precedent
so far and there naturally is some concern among those who are re-
sponsible for the executive branch about making a precedent now.
But I want to conclude by saying this, that I expect to get the files.
I have asked for the files as a gentleman and not as a sheriff, because
I think the President of the United States is entitled to some respect
whether he is a Democrat or Republican or what he may be, and I said
on the floor of the Senate, when I was asked whether we would issue
a subpena that insofar as I was concerned I would not issue a subpena
until I had made a proper and decent request for the files, before
resorting to any such action, which might be misinterpreted by the
person against whom it was directed.
Senator Hickenlooper. Then do I understand, Mr. Chairman,
that this subcommittee must, at a time to be prescribed at the con-
venience of the State Department, go with hat in hand and stand
outside of some door until they, in their own good time, will open that
door and, under certain regulations, restrictions, and surveillance,
watch over the deliberations of this committee and say, at certain
points, "Uh-uh, you can't go any further than that ; you must do this" I
In other words, are we to investigate this under the direction of the
State Department or are we to investigate it under the direction and
the power and the authority of a Senate committee that is set up under
a resolution?
Senator Tydings. You know just as well as I do that if the Presi-
dent refuses to give us these files there is no way in the world that we
can get them. I am going to proceed upon the premise that we want
the files, although I have some doubts about that in some quarters.
Nevertheless, I want the files.
Seantor McMahon. I am not so sure, Mr. Chairman, that they want
the files. What they want is a refusal of the files.
Senator Tydixgs. I am not going to say that, but that inference is
clearly drawn. I am going to get those files if it is humanly possible
for me to do it, and I am going to do it in a way that I think will
bring success and not bring controversy and smear up this issue when
it ought not to be smeared up but clarified.
I think we ought to give the witness now a chance to be interrogated
by Senator Hickenlooper, and I will say that I will call a meeting of
this connnittee at their earliest convenience to go into all the proceduies
that are now before us.
Senator Hickexlooper. At the outset, Mr. Chairman, Senator
McCarthy, who is in the room, just came up a moment ago and gave
me some Avhispered information in my ear, and I said, "Have you got
the papers there?" and he said "Yes, he had," so he brought them up.
I was handed what is alleged to be — I have no personal knowledge of
this at all — a receipt for a registered letter mailed Saturday afternoon,
March 18, at 5 : 20 p. m. to Senator Tydings. It bears a Washington
post office stamp showing the fees. Its register number is 342589.
256 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
It lias a copy of a letter of March 18 addressed to Senator Millard
Tydings, chairman, Foreign Relations Subcommittee, Washington,
D. C, signed by Joe McCarthy, which is as follows :
Dear Senator Tydings : Enclosed are the names which you as chairman of the
subcommittee demanded that I furnish in connection with tlie 81 cases cited on
the Senate floor. They are being submitted as part of the record in executive
session. I believe you will find complete and detailed reports on each in the
\arious files which I indicated to the committee the other day, namely State
Department, Civil Service, and FBI. I would, however, like the right to present
to the committee additional documentation in cases of bad security from time
to time.
Attached to that — may I complete the exhibit, because I am going
to offer this whole business here in the record
Senator Tydings. The names too?
Senator Hickenlooper. Senator McCarthy desires that I offer the
names in executive session. I will hand them to the Chair, and he may
do what he wishes.
Attached thereto is a list of 81 names. Then another letter attached
to this file, a copy of a letter alleged to be signed by R. H. Hillenkoetter,
lear admiral, Director of Central Intelligence, to Hon. Joseph
McCarthy. Senator McCarthy has just whispered in my ear that he
prefers that that not be made public, that copy of that letter. I shall
hand the entire file to the chairman. The first page has the registered
receipt for the letter containing the 81 names.
Senator Tydings. I am certainly glad to get them. It is exactly 1
month to the day since the 81 cases were brought before the attention
of the Senate. This is the first time I have had the names in my
hand, and I shall request, before the day is over, from appropriate
officials in the State Department, to get these files available to the
committee at the earliest possible date.
Senator Hickenlooper. One other thing, Mr. Chairman. I think it
is very important, in the interests of complete examination of this
matter at this moment and ineffective as I think any examination of
this kind can be without full access to the files, that a decision be made
on whether or not Senator McCarthy, who is the moving force in con-
nection with Mr. Jessup. be permitted to interrogate Mr. Jessup at this
time, when they can confront each other.
Senator Tydings. I am sorry ; I did not get your request. I was con-
ferring with Senator Green.
Senator Hickenlooper. Personally I have no knowledge of these
files. I say that I think it is very important that Senator McCarthy
confront Mr. Jessup. He is here ; Senator McCarthy is here. I know
nothing about this matter. I have no particular or specific questions
that I can ask Mr. Jessup. I don't know Mr. Jessup. I have never
seen any information on him of any kind. I think it is very important
that Senator McCarthy, who has generated this matter, be permitted
to bring up whatever matters he has with Mr. Jessup. Mr. Jessup has
come up here, I assume, at his own request, and I would like to urge
that, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Tydings. We will lay this question before the committee
and decide on procedure. I do not want to be precluded from passing
on it in the committee. However, I think this is a fair observation,
that Mr. Jessup did not know he was to be accused, I presume, until
he heard about it through the press. Mr. Jessup was not invited to
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 257
be here to cross-examine Senator McCartliy. The Constitution of the
United States, in the bill of rights, says — and this is a pretty serious
case — that every man accused of any offense is entitled to be con-
fronted Avith the witnesses against him. I do not think it gives a
comparable right to his accuser. So if we are going to go along in the
democratic process, at least, I think Mr. Jessup might be entitled to
interrogate Senator McCarthv.
Senator Hickenlooper. I think that is utterly fair.
Senator Tydings. Further than that, the committee itself has had
no opportunity to interrogate Senator McCarthy up to now. We did
have some discussion about a collateral matter the first 2 days, when
the chairman wanted to get the name of a man who was accused of
attemi)ting to fix the State Department records, but other than that,
in the Ken>'on and all the other cases, outside of asking for the date
of a document or something of that sort, there has been no chance for
the connnittee to ask Senator McCarthy any questions, and certainly
the committee is going ahead asking Mr. Jessup questions when they
have not even had a chance to ask Senator McCarthy any questions
yet-
Senator JNIcCaRtht. Mr. Chairman, I will be glad to let Mr. Jessup
ask me any questions he cares to.
Senator Tydings. Just a minute. We have not asked you as yet,
Senator McCarthy. I think it would have been fair if these people
against whom charges are brought might have been notified so that
they might have at least been here and heard the charges against them.
But that has not been done, and therefore I think we have got to be
as fair to one side as we are to the other in this matter, and you your-
self asked that you not be interrupted, finally, until you could completer
your statement, and the committer sat more or less mute. Up to the
present time it has had no chance to ask you questions and I would
like to ask you several questions, particularly about the discrepancies
that have appeared in various statements that you have made con-
cerning the number of people who are card-carrying Communists now
in the State Department, and known to the Secretary of State.
So far as I read your debate on the Senate floor and your charges
before this committee, you have not charged a single person, so far
as I can recall, with being a card-carrying Communist now in the
State Department. Nevertheless, according to the press, those charges
have been printed all over the United States and there has been no
evidence before this committee from you, sir, or from anybody else,
that assert any of the individuals named are card-carrying Com-
munists or members of the Con:wnunist Party.
Go ahead. Senator Hickenlooper.
Senator Hickenlooper. I take it that the committee at this time
says that Senator McCarthy cannot confront Mr. Jessup.
Senator Tydings. Not until we pass on it as a committee, and one
of your colleagues is absent. We want his version of what should be
done. I will call a meeting this afternoon, if we can get the full com-
mittee together, and lay this matter before them. It is all one with
me. I have no preconceived ideas, except tluit I am going to be fair
to both sides so far as I am able.
Senator Hickenlooper. I think Senator Lodge, who had a very
unfortunate situation at his home, will not be here today and perhaps
258 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INA^ EST I CATION
not tomorrow. I do not know. I checked with his office this morn-
ing and they are not certain whether he will be here tomorrow. He
is not in town today.
Then, Mr. Chairman, I have just a few questions, and I feel that
I am moving utterly in the dark in this matter. I have no particular
things to ask of Mr. Jessup that could possibly be generated by any
previous information.
Senator Tydings. Senator Hickenlooper, if you will pardon an in-
terruption, it is now 5 minutes to 12. If it meets with your approval,
the chairman would be glad to have a recess whenever you wish it, and
meet again at 2 oVlock or 2 : 30, during which time you might confer
with Senator McCarthy and get such data as he has, so that you
can use those data to cross-examine Ambassador Jessup. I would be
delighted to do that. .
Sentaor Hickenlooper. Mr. Chairman, I sort of reserve the right
to make up my own mind on what questions I ask.
Senator Ttdixgs. I am only suggesting it.
Senator Hickenlooper. And I would like to have the information
on which to pass my own judgment on the questions I ask, rather
than to be spoon-fed information from the State Department or from
Senator McCarthy or anybody else. ,r ^ i i
Senator Tydings. I only said that because Senator McCarthy has
been handing you information. I thought you might want time to
get it all. ^ . _ . -
Senator Hickenlooper. Senator McCarthy did hand me some very
definite information about the registered letter he sent you.
Senator Tydings. Also, in the Kenyon case, as I recall, he gave you a
list of a great many propositions to put to Judge Kenyon.
Senator Hickenlooper. And incidentally, in the Kenyon clise, mav
I suggest that the day after Judge Kenyon was on the stand I learned
some very pertinent information about Judge Kenyon which I think
would have been very important had I known it at the time she was
on the stand so I could have interrogated her about that particular
matter, but I did not have access to any files, and I have some reason
to believe that this information which I did not have is contained m
Judge Kenyon's files, and therefore that examination was not only ot
the most cursory nature, but I had nothing particularly to go on.
Mr. Jessup, I apologize for attempting to interrupt you when 1 tirst
sat down. I was about 7 minutes late here and I found the hearing
was already under wa}^ j. j +
On pao-e 2 of your statement there is the matter that i wanted to
mention at that time. You say in the next to the last paragraph, about
the fourth line:
However, I do not believe in tlie concept of guilt by association.
I am using the mimeographed copy.
Ambassador Jessup. Yes, sir. ^ , . , ■,- j
Senator Hickenlooper. Then, a little later on I think you discussed
the legal philosophy of guilt by association as not necessarily being
an accepted doctrine in American jurisprudence.
Ambassador Jessup. Yes, sir.
Senator Hickenlooper. You are, of course, aware ot the doctrine
that is accepted generally in American jurisprudence, of circumstan-
tial evidence ; are you not ?
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVEISTIGATION 259
Ambassador Jessup. Yes, sir.
Senator Htckenlooper. And that comes pretty close to the doctrine,
when it is nsed to convict, of fyiiilt by association; does it not?
Ambassador Jessup. I think tliere is quite a difference, Senator,
Senator Hickexlooper. I tliink tliere are some legalistic differ-
ences, yes, indeed; but circumstantial evidence is nevertheless, when
it is used for conviction, evidence which is produced by circumstances
rather than b}^ actual proof or visible witnesses of the commission of
the actual crime. Is that roughly the concept?
Ambassador Jessup. I should think that would be sufficient, sir.
Senator Htckenlooper. So there would be elements of guilt by as-
sociation in our concept of circumstantial evidence; would you agree
with that ?
Ambassador Jessup. I think there is quite a difference between what
is commonly called guilt by association and the doctrine of the ad-
mission of circumstantial evidence in a criminal trial.
Senator Hickenlooper. I assure you, Dr. Jessup, that I shall avoid
at all costs getting into a legalistic dispute with a law professor. I
respect your judgment and ability and I do not feel that I can cope
with you on the finer points of the law.
Ambassador Jessup. Thank you, sir.
Senator Hickenlooper. Do you believe that there is anything to the
doctrine that I might describe as "risk through association"? We
have heard a great deal about guilt by association, and that seems
to come up every so often — guilt by association. But is there some-
thing to risk by association, especially where people are in sensitive
positions of importance in the Government? Is it well to look into
their associates to determine whether or not there is a risk involved
in the positions those people hold?
Ambassador Jessup. I stated, Senator, in my statement, and I would
like to repeat that part :
Although I cannot claim to have any detailed knowledge of the process, I
wholeheartedly support the efforts of those whose official responsibility it is to
see that Communists or Communist sympathizers are kept out of our Govern-
ment.
I understand that part of the process involves an investigation of
the kind that you have referred to. What I would suggest. Senator, is
that in connection with the so-called doctrine of guilt by association
there seems to be a tendency to select the existence of one name,
coupled with another name, in some list, in some undefined context,
and to assume that that means that the coexistence of those names
reflects the attitude and position of the person in question.
One might just as well say, in my opinion, that if one had a photo-
graph of the GI's who shook hands with the Russian soldiers when
the American and Russian Armies first met in Germany one might
charge that the GI who was shaking hands with the Russian was
guiltily associated with communism. I think there is nothing in
that kind of attempt to associate persons or events which has any
validity, and it is that which I object to, sir.
Senator Hickexlooper. Then I take it that you discard any idea
that the membership of an individual in one organization wliich is
determined to be subversive or pro-Communist is, of course, not much
evidence of that person's sympathy for the Communist or subversive
cause ?
260 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
Ambassador Jessup. I think tlie important thing, Senator, is
whether he knowingly belongs to an organization which is support-
ing Communist objectives and, with that knowledge, continues his
support.
Senator HiCKENLOorER. Let us say that one case makes not a very
strong case. Would you say that two or three instances where the in-
dividual is a member or a sponsor of organizations that have been
declared to be subversive, or afterward are found to be subversive,
were such as to strengthen a suspicion that this person has a leaning
toward that kind of philosophy ?
Ambassador Jessup. I think not necessarily, Senator, and I think
that was brought out in the testimony of Judge Kenyon.
Senator Hickexlooper. Would you say 15 such cases would
add cumulatively to the question as to whether or not that person
had leanings toward the philosophy of these subversive organizations?
Ambassador Jessup. Obviously, sir, that is cumulative, but I do
not think it atfects the principle.
Senator Hickenlooper. And suppose twenty-five cases occurred
where this person was a member of organizations either declared or
iound to be subversive. Would you think that that would be cumu-
lative evidence which might raise a question for reasonable inquiry ?
Ambassador Jessup. I think it is necessary in those cases, Senator,
to do two things: First, to find out whether the organization was
publicly branded and known to be subvei^ive at the time of the in-
dividual's contact with it. and in the second place, what was the
nature of the contact of the individual with the organization. The
fact that you had 25 or 50 such cases
Senator Hickenlooper. I was going to suggest, suppose there were
Ambassador Jessup. I would say, sir, whether there were 25 or
50 or 56, unless one pays some attention to the other two factors which
1 have just referred to ,, . .i p ^ j;
Senator Hickenlooper. But would you say that the tact ot mem-
bership in a large number of organizations which either have been
declared or have been found by official bodies to be Communist front,
that the membership of an individual in a substantial number— let
us say 25 or 30, or 40, or as many as 50— would be sufficient grounds
to inquire, then, into the further activities of that individual or the
organizations involved, in order to arrive at a proper judgment on
the attitude of this individual? _ u . ^i
Ambassador Jessup. If you mean, sir, whether it would be the
duty of those officially charged with examining into the loyalty ot
an individual to determine whether that person should be appointed
to a position of trust or any position under the Government of the
United States, I would say "yes". If it is merely the basis for mak-
ino- a public charge without an investigation of those facts, I say no.
^Senator Hickenlooper. Now, then, putting another hypothetical
question, if the record of such an individual did disclose member-
ship in a large number of organizations which had been declared or
found to be subversive, and if the persons in charge of the appoint-
ment of that individual, knowing that, then failed to make any fur-
ther inquiry or examination into the attitude or other activities ot
this individual along those lines, would you say that they had failed
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVEtSTIGATION 261
to do wliat the preliminary information should properly indicate in
connection with security risk matters?
Ambassador Jessip. My understanding of an investigation of that
kind, Senator, is that the investigator is to look into all affirmative
and negative evidence. I assume that is done whether they find 1 case
or 50 such cases. It is their duty to look into the question.
Senator TTicKEXLOorER. Would you consider membership in such
organizations to be negative evidence as original evidence as a basis
for further investigation?
Ambassador Jessup. I should say that without an investigation of
the facts to which I have referred it is still very slight evidence. In
other words, as I have said before, it seems to me necessary to know
whether at the time of this hypothetical association of an individual
with an organization that organization was itself actually subversive,
or was known to be such; and secondly, I think it is necessary to
examine into the exact nature of the association of the individual with
that organization.
Senator Hickexlooper. Dr. Jessup, do you have any objection what-
soever, or any reservation, with respect to this subcommittee, as a
subcommittee, fully examining all of the files and the information con-
tained in Govenment departments with respect to you ?
Ambassador Jessitp. So far as I personally' am concerned, sir, every-
thing in my record or anything which anybody has found out about
me can be made public. So far as the question which has been dis-
cussed in this committee this morning, as to whether the executive
department should turn over the files to the committee, that is a
question with which I am not charged and on which I should not like to
express any opinion.
Senator Hickexlooper. Do you have any personal objection to those
files being turned over?
Ambassador Jessup. As I have said, Senator, I have no objection
to any information about my career being made public at any time.
Senator Hickexlooper. I am not even suggesting that any informa-
tion be made public.
Ambassador Jessup. So far as I am concerned, it can be made public.
Senator Hickexlooper. The question I asked was, Do you have any
objection to the turning over of the files?
Ambassador Jessup. As I said, Senator, I am not concerned with the
question of policy involved, as to wdiether the executive department
should turn over its files to the Senate committee.
Senator Tydixgs. You said you had a statement there. Was that
in answer to one of the questions ?
Ambassador Jessup. I merely wanted to add, in connection with
what I have just said. Senator, a paragraph from a letter written by
Mr. Peyton Ford, Assistant to the Attorney General, to Senator Elbert
Thomas on IVIarch 6, 1950, which I think is pertinent, if I may. It is
very short, Senator. He wrote :
It is characteristic of many front organizations that their purported purposes
and programs are designed to appeal to loyal Americans and frequently it is
behind a screen of respectability, loyalty, and even patriotism that subversive
activities are carried on, often by only a few disloyal persons. In other instances
a small minority subverts an organization of previously good purposes and hav-
ing many members of unquestionable loyalty to the United States.
It is because I believe that is an accurate statement and a sound
statement that I have made the comments which I have, indicating
262 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
that the mere association is not a sound basis for condemning an
individual.
Senator Hickenlooper. Again I want to call your attention to the
fact that I draw a sharp distinction between conviction based upon
association and the question of risk indicated by investigation into
association. There is a vast difference between risk, in my judgment,
in public office — that is personnel risk — and conviction of any specific
crime. I think it has been authoritatively testified to that the Com-
munists have not carried cards in this country for better than 2 years.
They are ordered not to. And positive proof of membership in the
Communist Party, I am told, is a most difficult thing indeed to produce.
Ambassador Jessup. May I just also say, Senator, that I wanted to
make clear the distinction which exists in my own mind between the
process of investigation of a person considered for appointment in the
Government service and the question of public charges which are made
without an opportunity for the individual to be confronted with the
evidence and to answer in regard to what seem to me to be the perti-
nent facts.
Senator Hickenlooper. On page 3 of your statement, with respect
to the dinner on May 7, 1946, given by the American-Russian Insti-
tute
Ambassador Jessup. Yes, sir.
Senator Hickenlooper. The only thing that I know about that is
that that was quite an important dinner apparently ; it was a dinner
for the presentation of the First Annual Award to Franklin D. Roos-
evelt, which would be a matter of some importance, but I notice in
your statement that you don't remember whetlier or not you attended
that dinner. The thing that caught my eye was that on the rest of the
page, and part of the next page, you remembered very distinctly at-
tending meetings back, I believe, as far as 1943 and 1939 and 1933, I
believe, is the earliest one. I thought it rather unusual that you
wouldn't remember wliether or not you attended a dinner that was
given for an award of this kind in 1946.
Ambassador Jessup. Well, may I say in regard to that. Senator,
that as I pointed out in my statement, I searched my files to see if
there were any information on this matter, and I couldn't find any.
I also pointed out that I was very seriously ill in the hospital from
February to June of that year, so that it was unlikely that I attended:.
Perhaps that was an understatement.
Senator Hickenlooper. I have an alleged photostat of a letterhead
of the American Law Student's Association, Woolworth Building,
room 530, New York, N. Y., in which you are listed as a Faculty Ad-
visory Board member ; that is, there is listed from Columbia Univer-
sity the name Prof. Philip Jessup. Were you a member -of that
organization ?
Ambassador Jessup. I have a very slight recollection of that or-
ganization. If I may refresh my recollection on it
Senator Hickenlooper, Yes.
Ambassador Jessup. What was the year of that supposed affilia-
tion, Senator, if I may ask?
Senator Hickenloper. I don't have a date on this letterhead. I
have an alleged photostat of a letterhead which you may look at.
Ambassador Jessup. I did make an attempt to find out whether
I had any such associaiton, and the best I could do in trying to find
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 263
some record on it, or stimulating my memory, was this, tliat I recalled
that perhaps 10 years ago some of the students at Columbia had asked
me to serve on the Advisory Board of an association. It may have
been this one. So far as 1 could tell from my files, the last contact
I had with it was about February or March of 11)40. I have no
definite recollection about the organization or of my association
with it.
Senator Hickenlooper. I believe the American Law Student's As-
sociation is listed as an affiliate of the American Youth Congress,
which was cited as a Communist front by Attorney General Bidclle on
I\Iay 28. 1948, by the Special Committee of the House Committee on
Appropirations April 1, 1948, and by the Special Committee on Un-
American Activities on June 25, 1942, and on March 29, 1944, and also
by the Massachusetts House Committee Report On Un-American
Activities in 1938, which would put it more than 10 years ago.
Senator Green. That w^as not the organization with which Dr.
Jessup was connected.
Senator Hickenlooper. The organization, as I stated a moment
ago, was affiliated with the American Youth Congress.
Ambassador Jessup. As of what date. Senator, w^as it affiliated?
Was that found ?
Senator Hickenlooper. I do not have the date upon which it was
affiliated, but the American Youth Congress, I believe, was cited as a
Connnunist-front organization by the Massachusetts House Com-
mittee Report on Un-American Activities in 1938.
Ambassador Jessup. Do I understand that the American Law Stu-
dent's iVssociation is not in your citation ?
Senator Hickenlooper. The American Law Student's Association,
I believe, w^as an affiliate of the American Youth Congress.
Ambassador Jessup. But you have not indicated on what date it
became affiliated, sir?
Senator Hickenlooper. No.
Ambassador Jessup. I see. Thank you.
Senator Ttdings. Might I ask, too, if the organization that was
delineated as being subversive in Massachusetts was a local chapter
or a national' chapter? Was it the local orgnization, the State branch
of that organization, or was it an indictment of the whole organiza-
tion throughout the whole United States? Do you Itnow?
Senator Hickenlooper. I do not know.
Senator Ttdings. I would not think an organization in Massachu-
setts or California or any of these State agencies would be in a posi-
tion to indict an organization nationally. I would presume they
would indict an organization in their own State, but it would be a
little diihcult to know how^ they would indict an organization that
covers the United States.
Senator Hickenlooper. I understand the American Law Student's
Association was affiliated with the United Student's Peace Committee,
347 IVIadison Avenue, New York City. That is according to an ex-
hibit, volume 12, page 7568 and 75G9 of the Report of the House Com-
mittee on Un-American Activties.
Ambassador Jessup. I don't know about those organizations. I
don't know Avhether they existed at the time of my meager associa-
tion with the American Law Student's Association.
08970—50— pt. 1 18
264 STAVE DEPARTMEWT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
Senator Hickenlooper. For whatever worth this may be, I believe
the Dailv Worker of February 27, 1937, on page 2, lists the American
Law Student's Association as an affiliate of the American League
Against War and Fascism. The American League Against War and
Fascism has been cited as a Communist front by the Special Commit-
tee on Un-American Activities and by Attorney General Biddle.
Ambassador Jessup. I don't read that paper, sir, so I wasn t aware
^ Senator Hickenlooper. I don't either. I said that it is alleged
that that was printed there. , . -, -r p i ^ +
The letter head which I have here, which I referred to a nioment
a<ro containing the name of Prof. Philip C. Jessup on the facuUv ad-
vfsJry board, bears the union label imprint of Local 209 of New York
City which I am informed is the Communist print shop of New York,
the'letterhead being printed in a Communist print shop. I can otter
that in evidence, Mr. Chairman. . ^ ^t - .
Senator Tydings. It will be printed m the record at this point.
American Law Student's Association
woolwobth building, boom 530
New York, N. Y.
Faculty Advisory Board : Faculty Advisory Board— Continued
Northwestern University School of Brooklyn Law School
T„ Prof. Jerome Prince
Dean Leon Green Prof. Abraham Rotwein
New York University Yale Law School
Dean Frank Sommers Prof. L red Rodell
Prof F D. Sloovers Prof. Abe Fortas
Prof" Augustin Derby National Executive Board:
Prof WiUiam Walsh Robert Page, president
P of. He^an Grey Thomas Levinia, vice president
e. Tnhns University Morris Engel, secretary
Vice Dean John Maloney Norman Leonard, treasurer
Prof. D. S. Edgar, Sr.
Prof. D. S. Edgar, Jr.
Columbia University
Prof. Elliot Cheatham
Prof. Walter Gellhorn
Prof. Philip Jessup
Union label (109). From Communist print shop.
Senator Hickenlooper. Now, Mr. Jessup oil page 6 of JOur state-
ment you are quoting some attitudes toward China. I would like to
ask you, are you in complete agreement with the present policy of the
StatI Department towaid China as announced some 2 months ago with
respect to the withdrawing of support from Cl^^ang Kai-shek
Senator TymNGS. I am not going to interfere with this question,
but I do not see what that has to do with the fact of whetheT disloyal
persons are employed in the State Department or whether Mr. Jessup
is a Communist or not, because I think in both parties there are a great
manv men who disagree or who agree. i i i j
Senator McMahon. The Formosa beachhead was abandoned, and
I suggest if they want to reestablish it with this committee you go
^'senator Tydings. I suggest that if we go into all of the ramifica-
tions of our China policy we will be here until Christmas.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 265
Senator Hickenlooper. May I just clear that up and say that I
asked the question as a direct result of the statements made in Mr.
Jessup's statement
Senator Tydixgs. Go ahead.
Senator Hickexloopek. In which he stated his philosophy toward
China quite clearly, and I would like to inquire whether Mr. Jessup
is in full accord with present announced State Department policy to-
ward China as contained in a statement of a few weeks ago — I can't
give you the exact date.
Ambassador Jessup. I don't identify the particular statement,
Senator, but I have no hesitation in saying that I am in complete
accord with the policy of the United States toward China at the pres-
ent time.
Senator Hickexloopek. That is, the position the State Department
has taken i
Ambassador Jessup. The position of the State Department is the
position of the United States with regard to international policy.
Senator Hickexloopek. Then further with respect to your state-
ment on page 6 with regard to China policy, were you in accord with
the policies which General Marshall was sent to put into effect? In
other words, as I understand them, the inclusion of some Communist
members in a coalition government in China ?
Ambasador Jessup. Senator, if I may, I suggest that that is a rather
misleading question.
Senator Hickexloopek. I don't w ant it to be misleading.
Ambassador Jessup. It assumes the nature of General Marshall's
mission. I should like to point out that I had no connection with
far eastern policy of the State Department at that time. The slight
connection I had with the State Department at that time was solely
in regard to matters having to do with the United Nations, its organ-
ization, and the codification and development of international laW'.
Senator Hickexloopek. Are you acquainted with Mr. Owen Latti-
more ?
Ambassador Jessup. Yes, sir.
Senator Hickex^looper, When was the last time you saw Mr. Lat-
timore?
Ambassador Jessup. I don't remember, exactly. I should think
perhaps a year or two ago. I don't remember the last time.
Senator Hickexloopek, When did you leave for China and the Far
East on your last trip ?
Ambassador Jessup. I sailed from San Francisco on Demember 20.
My memory is refreshed now that ISIr. Lattimore was in Washing-
ton at a meeting which I attended shortly before that time. That was
then in last December which must have been the last time I saw him.
Senator Hickexloopek. Did you discuss China policy with Mr.
Lattimore at that time?
Ambassador Jessup. Yes, sir; with a large group of people who
were at the Department at that time. I think there were about 30
of them.
Senator Hickexloopek. What was Mr. Lattimore's capacity at that
timei'
Ambassador Jesslt. Mr. Lattimore's capacity was — I don't know
his exact title. He is on the faculty of Johns Hopkins University,
I believe the director of a research institute there
266 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INYESTIGATTON
Senator Tydings. The William Hines Page chair.
Ambassador jESsrp. The William Hines Page chair.
Senator Hickenlogper. Was Mr. Lattimore at that tnne actmg m
the capacity of consnltant to the State Department, do you know ?
Ambassador Jessup. I could not say definitely, sir, the actual com-
position of that group, which I would be glad to furnish to the
committee. I haven't it all in mind. I remember it included Mr.
Harold Stassen, among others. They were a group of citizens of the
United States who had had contact with or had ideas about the Far
East and were brought down to the State Department for a conference
which, as I recall, lasted 2 days, so that we could have a general dis-
cussion of views about far eastern policy. They included some busi-
nessmen, bankers, one representative of missionary interests, and a
number of academic people.
Senator Hickenlogper. How long after that meeting was
Senator Green. Mr. Chairman, may i ask the Senator kindly to
o-ive us the ground for this line of examination ? What has it to do
with the loyalty of the witness? Is this guilt by association with Mr.
Lattimore? If so, I think he should tell us why Mr. Lattimore is a
person one should not associate with.
Senator Tydings. What do you say to that ?
Senator Hickenlogper. I say I shall pursue my own line of ques-
tioning unless the committee forbids me.
Senator Tydings. Objection overruled. The witness will proceed.
Senator Green. I have made no objection. I thought we might be
enlightened as to the purpose of this line of questioning, if there were
Senator Hickenlogper. How long after this meeting of the State
Department was it before you left for China? -, ,i ^ .
Ambassador Jessup. I can't remember the exact date of that meet-
ing. I think it was a matter of weeks.
Senator Hickenlogper. Two or three weeks, would you say i
Ambassador Jessup. I don't remember the exact date. I think it was
early in December and I left Washington, I believe, on the 15th to
begin my trip. j.- •4.-U -\/r„
Senator Hickenlogper. Did you have any conversations with Mr.
Lattimore of any kind after that meeting and prior to your departure
for China?
Ambassador Jessup. I do not recall any. .• vu
Senator Hickenlogper. Did you have a telephone conversation with
Mr. Lattimore after that meeting in the State Department and before
your departure for China ? . -ui x i '<-
Ambassador Jessup. I don't recall any. It is possible. I dont
^"^ Senator' Hickenlogper. Do you recall whether you had a telephone
conversation with Mr. Lattimore in which you asked him to accom-
pany vou to China ? .
Ambassador Jessup. I never asked him to accompany me, I never
suggested it, I never thought of it.
Senator Hickenlogper. At no time?
Ambassador Jessup. At no time. -, ^ . i • w
Senator Hickenlogper. Then Mr. Lattimore could not have said to
you that he thought it was better that he not accompany you on that
trip ?
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVEISTIGATION 267
Ambassador Jessup. We had no such conversation.
Senator IIickexloopek. Mr. Jessiip, I believe you were a character
"witness, were you not, for Mr. Alger Hiss?
Ambassador Jessup. I was, sir.
Senator Hickenlooper. Character witnesses are witnesses who at-
tempt to meet the matter of association, are they not? When one
testifies as to the character of an individual, that is testimonial as to
that individual's associations and general reputation, isn't that so?
Ambassador Jessup. My understanding of the role of character
witness, Senator, is that it is a very essential part of our jury system
under which traditionally a person accused is entitled to have the
testimony of persons who are familiar with him in regard to his repu-
tation in the community.
Senator Hickenlooper. Are you of the same opinion about Mr.
Hiss that you were when you testified as a character witness for him
at his trial ?
Ambassador Jessup. The testimony which I gave in his trial, sir,
as you have properly pointed out, was as a character witness, in which
I testified to the reputation. I see no reason to alter the statements
which I made under oath as a witness in that case.
Senator Hickenlooper. I was asking you whether your opinion at
this time would permit you to give the same evidence now as you gave
at that time.
Senator Green. I object, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Tydings. Wliat is the objection?
Senator Green. I object on the ground it has nothing to do with
the testimony that has been given.
Senator Tydings. Let's be as broad as we can. I think it is a little
beside the point.
Ambassador Jessup. I will be glad to answer tb-^t, Senator. I
would like to say this about it. It seems to me that this line of ques-
tioning, perhaps unconsciously on the Senator's part, is designed to
involve me in comments upon the charges which have been made
against Mr. Hiss and for which he was tried. As the Senator well
knows, it is a very important part of the principles of our system that
comments by members of the bar particularly, about matters which
are before a court, are not appropriate. I believe that that is an
important part of our system. I have been a member of the bar for
some 25 years, and I do not intend to engage in a public discussion
of the charges which have been made against Mr. Hiss and which are
still before the courts. It is for the court to pass upon those charges.
Senator Hickenlooper. Dr. Jessup, did you join with a group of
other Columbia University professors in addressing a letter to the
editor of the New York Times on the subject of the atomic bomb, which
letter appeared in that paper, I believe, on February 16, 1946 ^
Ambassador Jessup. Yes, sir. I should like to get that letter here
before you. That was a letter, sir, which was printed in the New
York Times on February 16.
Senator Green. What year ?
Ambassador Jessup. 1946. I will be glad to submit a photostat
of it for the record. The signers of that letter were a group of the
Columbia University faculty. Their names were: Prof. L. C. Dunn,
I. Edman, A. P. Evans, S. Hecht, P. C. Jessup, R. M. Maclver, Edgar
268 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
IMiller, F. C. Mills, George B. Pegram, I. L. Eabi, J. Scliilt, C. S.
Shoiip.
I would like to point out, sir, that among those the names of Pro-
fessor Pegram and Professor Eabi are particularly well known in con-
nection with the matters of atomic energy, since both of them were
leading physicists prominently associated with what was known as the
Manhattan project, which was the project nnder which much of the
\Aork on the development of the atomic bomb went on during the war.
Professor Pegram, the dean of the faculty at Columbia, and Pro-
fessor Eabi, Nobel prize winner and one of the leading physicists en-
gaged in the atomic research program, are two of the signers.
I would like to call attention to the fact that this letter was written
some 4 months before the Baruch proposals were made known. It was
a conscientious effort on the part of this group of us at Columbia
to make what seemed to us at the time a useful suggestion in regard
to the procedures which should be followed in the discussion of control
of the atomic bomb through the United Nations. I have a photostat
of that letter and will be glad to submit it.
Senator Hickenlooper. I would like to read this letter into the
record. This letter is as follows under the heading "Urge bomb-
making vacation. Columbia professors ask declaration to aid UNO
Commission."
To the Editor of the New York Times :
In view of the establishment of the UNO Commission on the Atomic bomb,
we would like to suggest a declaration of policy of the following nature by the
President of the United States in order that the discussions of the UNO Commis-
sion may proceed in an atmosphere of full good faith and of confidence in their
successful outcome for international peace :
1. The United States will at once stop the production of bombs from material
currently produced. This includes the preparation of subassemblies and all
other procedures involved in the fabrication of bombs.
2. For 1 year, which would seem to be a reasonable time for the Commission
to mature its plans and to secure action on them by the governments concerned,
we will stop a •< uniulating puritied plutonium and uranium-235, which are the
essential ingredi nts of atomic bombs. The plants which produce these materials
will be kept merely in a stand-by condition. For this purpose they will run
at the minimum i-ate compatible with maintaining them in good order, but they
W'ill not accumulate the resulting purified and fissionable products. As produced,
these will be eliminated by appropriate means, such as dumping them into the
ocean or returning them to their original mixture.
3. We are prepared to have the disposition of our present stockpile of bombs
considered as one of the items in an agreement to be entered into by us and
the other governments.
I have read the letter signed by the individuals whom you named
a moment ago ?
Ambassador Jessup. Yes.
Senator Hickenlooper. I hand it now to the reporter for inclusion
as exhibit 53.
Now, Dr. Jessup, in the light of the fact that it has been very widely
reported that Eussian zeal in the production of atomic weapons has
not abated at any time, do you still feel that we should stop the pro-
duction of fissionable materials for a year and dump our accumulated
materials into the ocean ?
Ambassador Jessttp. I certainly do not, sir. That is a statement
which was made in 1946 without the benefit of hindsight. It was the
general hope at that time, I believe, of the Government of the United
States as well as the American people, that it would be possible to
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 269
reach an international agreement for tlie control of atomic energy,
and the policy of the Government, as is well known, was to submit
proposals to the United Nations with that end in view. We have since
found ont that the Soviet Union is not prepared to cooperate in any
feasible sheme for the control of atomic energy. Obviously under these
present circumstances a proposal made in February 1946 is inap-
plicable.
Senator Hickenlooper. Are you acquainted with Mr. Frederick
Vanderbilt Field?
Ambassador Jessup. I am, sir.
Senator Hickenlooper. Did you work with him in the Institute of
Pacific Relations?
Ambassador Jessup. I did, sir.
Senator Hickenlooper. Did he remain on in that institute after
you ceased your active associations or active participation in its
affairs at your insistence and request?
Ambassador Jessup. After I terminated my affiliation?
Senator Hickenlooper. Yes.
Ambassador Jessup. I never insisted or requested that he should
continue after I left.
Senator Hickenlooper. Are you aware of what public declara-
tions Mr. Field has made with regard to his affiliation or nonaffiliation
with the Communist Party?
Ambassador Jessup. I am not familiar with the text of them. I
understand he is now an editorial writer on some Communist paper
and I believe he has made some statements about his sympathy for
Communist causes in the last few years.
Senator Hickenlooper. Do you recall whether you were sponsor
in May of 1939 at a meeting of the National Emergency Conference
held in the Raleigh Hotel in Washington ?
Ambassador Jessup. If I may just look at my file notes, Senator,
there appears to have been, as I have been able to find, something
called a National Emergency Council for Democratic Rights. Is that
the one you refer to? Would you repeat again, sir, the one you have
in mind?
Senator Hickenlooper. I was going to ask you about the National
Emergency Conference. This was held on May 13 and 14, 1939, at
the Raleigh Hotel, in Washington.
Ambassador Jessup. I have actually at the moment no recollection
of that conference. I have seen a list which purports to be a list of
sponsors of this meeting. It is a long list, I have very little recollec-
tion about it. My recollection is that it was a meeting called to con-
sider certain bills then pending before Congress in regard to aliens,
so-called antialien bills pending in the Congress.
I didn't attend that meeting. I understand — I know — my name is
on the list, at least as it is reproduced, and I am willing to assume that
I consented to have it put on that list. I can vaguely remember some
of the matters which were under discussion at that time in connection
with the legislation. My recollection is that some of the bills which
were then before the Congress were amended before they were enacted
by the Congress. I do not recall the particular details of the bills
at this time which attracted my interest, or whether those were the pro-
visions which were rejected or accepted by the Congress in the enact-
ment of this legislation.
270
STATE DEPARTMETSTT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVEBTIGATION
Senator Hickenlooper. I take it you are aware, then, that this
organization has been declared a Communist-front organization by the
House Un-American Activities Committee.
Ambassador Jessup. I am not informed, sir, as to whether, at the
time this meeting was held, it had been publicly proclaimed a sub-
versive organization or whether the later finding was a finding that at
the time of this meeting it was subversive. I certainly had no knowl-
edge at the time that it was subversive, if that was the case. I don't
know whether it was or not.
Senator Hickenlooper. Were you a sponsor of the organization
which you mentioned a while ago, the National Emergency Council
for Democratic Rights, in the early part of 194:0^
Ambassador Jessup. So far as I know I was not individually a
sponsor of that. I find my name is listed there. Whether they con-
tinued the list of the people who were sponsors of that meeting which
we have just discussed or otherwise I don't recall. I don't recall the
organization or any participation in it.
Senator Hickenlooper. I do not have the exact date, but I believe
that has been listed as a Communist-front organization by the House
Committee on Un-American Activities.
Ambassador Jessup. I believe that w^as later. I would be glad to
put into the record, if you wish, Mr. Chairman, a complete list of the
sponsors. They are contained in the volume. Investigation of Un-
American Propaganda Activities in the United States; Special Com-
mittee on Un-American Activities, House of Representatives, on
page 1210.
Senator Tydings. Go ahead and put it in.
(The list referred to is as follows :)
Honorary chairman :
Prof. Franz Boas
Executive committee:
Alfred K. Stern, chairman
Daniel S. Gillmor, treasurer
Bertha Josselyn Foss, secretary
Samuel L. M. Barlow
Mrs. W. Russell Bowie
Oliver La Farge
George Marshall
Jeanne Ratner
Donald Ogden Stewart
Oswald Garrison Villard
J. Raymond Walsh
Board of sponsors :
Louis Adamic
Prof. Josephine T. Adams
Mary McLeod Bethune
Katherine Devereux Blake
Van Wyck Brooks
May M. Colum
Prof. Albert Sprague Coolidge
Virginius Dabney
Prof. Jerome Davis
Prof. Paul Douglas
Dr. Haven Emerson
Prof. Henry Pratt Fairchild
Prof. Irving Fisher
Osmond K. Franekel
Prof. Walter Gellhorn
Margaret Halsey
Dr. Alice Hamilton
Hon. Stanley M. Isaacs
Prof. Philip C. Jessup
Hon. Paul J. Kern
Prof. William H. Kilpatrick
Frieda Kirchwey
Mrs. William S. Ladd
Prof. Max Lerner
Johanna M. Lindlof
Prof. Robert Morss Lovett
Prof. Robert Lynd
Carey McWilliams
Prof. Clyde R. Miller
Mischa MischakofE
Bishop Walter Mitchell
Prof. Wesley C. Mitchell
Bishop Edward L. Parsons
Williams Pickens
Rev. A. Clayton Powell
Jeanne Ratner
Bertha C. Reynolds
Wallingt'ord Reigger
Prof. Margaret Schlauch
George Seldes
Prof. Harlow Shapley
George Soule
Maxwell S. Stewart
Hon. Robert K. Straus
Prof. Harold C. Urey
Prof. Oswald Veblen
Elizabeth Bacon Walling
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVEISTIGATION 271
Senator Hickenlooper, ]\Ir. Chairman, again with the statement
that had I been able to see the files in this case I might not have asked
the questions I did ask, or I miglit have asked me, I must say that I
consider this is an utterly inadequate examination even from the
standpoint of the questions asked or the questions that might not
have been asked if a full foundation of this matter could be laid, and
I again suggest that we cannot investigate these matters with fairness
to the witness or fairness to this committee until the files, and especi-
ally the files of these nine publicly mentioned cases, are available
for free and complete examination by the members of this committee.
Senator Tydings. The chairman will lay before the committee the
full files as soon as he can get them. In the meantime the charges were
made without access to the files, and rather than let people labor nnder
these accusations without a chance to appear and answer them, we
have given each one who has so far requested, demanded, or insisted
upon a hearing the chance to come publicly in the same manner that
the accusations were made and answer them.
However, the chairman will pursue his pursuit of the files with
some optimisim and hopes that he will soon have them available, but
he does appreciate the difficulties in the way and he is trying to get
the files by cooperation. In the event that a subpena was issued at
this or some later period in the proceedings, it is the fear of the
chairman it will block the access to the files by the committee, and
therefore what he wants is the files and is proceeding in the best way
he knows how to get them.
Senator Hickenlooper. I just want to say that it is entirely possible
and probable that when full information is available there w^ill be
other questions, and I hope that the witness will be available.
Senator Ttdixgs. IVIaybe some of the charges might also be with-
drawn when we have full access to the files.
Senator Green. Most unlikely.
Senator Tydings. I have two letters, addressed to Dr. Jessup but
sent to me, which I should like to read into the record. They are
short :
My Dear Jessup : I am shocked and distressed by the attack on your integrity
as a public servant.
Throughout your intimate sei'vice with me while I was Secretary of State
you were clearly outstanding as a representative of the Government both as to
your masterful presentations and the firmness of your oppostion to all Soviet or
Communist attacks or pressures. This was conspicuously the case during your
handling on the Security Council of the Berlin blockade issue.
Both the Under Secretary, Mr. Lovett, and I counted you as a great source
of strength to the State Deimrtment during those critical days.
Faithfully yours,
G. C. Makshaix.
The second letter :
My Dear Jessup: I am writing to tell you how much your university deplores
the association of your name with the current loyalty investigation in the United
States Senate.
Your long and distinguished record as a scholar and a public servant has
won for you the respect of your colleagues and of the American people as well.
No one who has known you can for a moment question the depth or sincerity of
your devotion to the principles of Americanism. Your university associates
and I are confident that any impression to the contrary will be quickly dispelled
as the facts become known.
Sincerely,
DwiGHT D. Eisenhower.
272 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVEISTIGATION
Ambassador Jessup. Thank you.
Senator Tydings. Senator Green ?
Senator Green. Dr. Jessup, in the first place let me congratulate
you on the way you have so thoroughly cleared whatever charges, so-
called, have been made against you.
Ambassador Jessup. Thank you.
Senator Green. There occurred to me as you testified two thoughts.
One is, how fortunate you are that you are able to do this thnig so
easily from the high level of your reputation and friends who are glad
to come to your assistance. What would have happened to you when
you were unknown instead of known, if you had tried to recover from
a similar charge? You would have had a shattered reputation under
those circumst'ances. It is appalling, the harm that would have been
done and the harm that may be done to younger men m the service
under similar circumstances.
The other matter is this : The terrible effect on the success of our
f oreif^n policies when confidence in the State Department is shattered.
You spoke briefly on that. I wish you would elaborate, if you will, a
little on what effect this particular hearing or this particular series of
hearings has on the success of our foreign policy abroad, or may
have. , . ^ . ii i. T
Senator Hickenlooper. May I ]ust at that point suggest that i
am not objecting to that question. I think it is a perfectly proper
question for the Senator to ask, but he objected strenuously to my
asking questions which did not go to the question of loyalty, m his
Senator Green. I did not object. The chairman stated I objected.
All I wanted to know was the grounds on which the questions were
asked, and you explained it was based on a portion of his stat:ement.
All I am asking him now is to elaborate what he stated too briefly m
his original statement. ^, , . .
Senator Tydings. Senator Green is correct. The chairman put
those words in his mouth.
Senator Hickenlooper. I think it is a very proper question to ask
the witness. . . j.- rr\
Senator Tydings. Everybody agrees it is a proper question, iiie
witness will proceed with his answer. • i i •
Ambassador Jessup. Senator, one point which I tried to bring out
in my statement was this, that when you have representatives of the
United States making public statements or official statements to officials
of other governments in regard to the questions which are now at
issue in the international scene, particularly between the Soviet Union
and the United States, it is obviously of the utmost importance that
the officials of other governments and the world as a whole should
have confidence that the official spokesmen of the United States are
persons who are trusted bv their Government.
Now I have found, sir,'in the course of my trip through tne Asian
countries, that as you get particular items of news carried from the
United States and perhaps reproduced only m the local papers
throuo-hout 15 or 17 countries of Asia that locally they do not always
distinguish between the statements which are officially made on be-
half of the United States in foreign policy by the Secretary of State
and statements which are made by other persons m high positions m
the American Government. And frequently the effect on the people
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVEISTIGATION 273
in these other countries is to get an impression which I think is a
wrong impression, that the United States is not united in its policy of
combating international communism and the imperialism of the Soviet
Union.
It seems to me, as I tried to point out in my statement, Senator Green,
that it is so important at this very serious juncture in international
atl'airs that the United States should speak with one voice, and that
we should make it perfectly clear not only to the governments of other
countries to whom you can privately explain one thing and another but
to all the peoples in all the other countries of the world that the
United States is a country which wholeheartedly supports the policy
which has been enunciated officially on our behalf.
For example, in this particuhir connection, I refer to the statement
by the Secretary of State in his recent speech at the University of
California.
I am not suggesting, Senator, that in our system of government we
want in any way to emulate the Soviet system, which makes it im-
possible for anyone to disagree with the government and line. We
are proud of our system which permits individuals to differ. But I
suggest in the context that we are discussing that it is a matter of the
utmost seriousness and a matter which does affect the success of the
international policies of the United States if the qualifications and the
integrity of the persons selected, confirmed by the Senate, to repre-
sent the United States in these negotiations, are called into question.
And that is why I have tried to stress, sir, my feeling that it is
important that these insinuations and charges should be cleared up.
Senator Green. Thank you.
Senator Ttdings. Senator McMahon ?
Senator McMahon. Dr. Jessup, I am proud to have you as a constit-
uent of mine.
Ambassador Jessup. Thank you, sir.
Senator McMahon. And I am delighted that you are a fellow citizen
of the State of Connecticut. I am also happy that we have you to
represent us in the United Nations. I think that you are entitled
to the thanks of all of our people for the magnificent work which you
have done and to which General Marshall and General Eisenhower
have paid tribute. I join with them.
Ambassador Jesstt. Thank you very much. Senator.
Senator Hickenlooper. INIr. Chairman, just one question.
Senator Tydings. Senator Hickenlooper ?
Senator Hickenlooper. It is generated as a result of the answer to
Senator Green's question.
You said. Dr. Jessup, that people in the Orient, for instance, might
look askance at disputes in this country and say we were not united. I
wonder what the people in the Orient think when they find that
Russian communism has apparently gained by either diplomacy or
something else what it probably could not have gained by war at this
lime; in other times, the complete dominion of China, all China. In
other words, do the people of the Orient believe that we. by such a
policy, are approving the Communist capture of China?
Ambassador Jessup. No ; certainly not.
Senator Hickenlooper. You said that certainly that would be very
fatal to our prestige, certainly among those in China who do not believe
in communism.
274 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVEISTIGATION
Ambassador Jesstjp. I would like to point out, Senator, that there
are always stages in international affairs in which the scales go up
and down. There were stages during the war at which it appeared to
the people of Asia that we were licked and that Japan was the master
of Asia, and they were wrong. There were momentary successes of the
Japanese forces and the people of Asia were wrong in thinking that
that meant that the United States was licked. If anybody now thinks
that at the present juncture of international affairs the United States
is licked, they are wrong again.
Senator Hickenlooper. I may suggest that during the period when
Japan was in the ascendancy tliere was still a fighting Nationalist
Chinese group there that gave physical and visible evidence of resist-
ance to communism. The situation, so far as I have been able to find
out, seems to be quite different now ; even with our own declarations
communism lias been extremely successful in China. It has driven the
Nationalist Chinese Government over to Formosa — what is left of it —
and with our policy declarations that we are pulling out our support,,
there seems to be no physical evidence in China upon which those who
dislike communism and oppose it have the least peg to hang their
hats on.
Ambassador Jessup. Mr. Chairman, if I may, I would like to suggest
that I hope to have an opportunity to discuss with the full Committee
on Foreign Relations the results of my trip and the information which
I gathered at that time. I think it would perhaps be more appro-
priate if I went into these details of the situation on that occasion, if
tJiat is in accordance with the wishes of the subcommittee.
Senator Hickenlooper. I do not care to continue discussing high
policy at this time. I only asked those questions
Senator Tydings. I am sure Senator Connally, of the Foreign Rela-
tions Committee, who is here, will seize the first available opportunity
to call the committee together so it may hear you, Dr. Jessup. I know
him well enough to assume that that is so, because he is always very
diligent in bringing information before the committee from those who
are well informed.
The Chairman (Senator Connally). I apologize for the interrup-
tion. We have that in mind. We were waiting, however, somewhat
the convenience of Dr. Jessup. We decided he probably would not
want to appear before the full committee until he had met these serious
charges, or so-called charges, whatever they are. So we have not
approached him about a time when it will be convenient, but we hope
you will hold yourself in readiness. We are very anxious to have you
before us and have a full exposition of developments in your trip
abroad.
Senator Tydings. Do not leave the room, committee members, for a
moment, because there is no scheduled meeting at present for the
committee, but I may want to get in touch with you this afternoon
in the light of information I hope to get sometime during the day and
arrange for a meeting.
In the meantime, Dr. J?ssup, I can always reach you, I suppose,
through the State Department.
Ambassador Jessup. Yes, sir.
Senator Tydings. Do you intend to be here for a few days ?
Ambassador Jessup. Yes, sir.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 275
Senator Tydings. Those members of the press who have requested
me to get copies of the two letters that were put in the record, if they
will come forward I will read them to them now.
Tiie meeting will stand adjourned subject to the call of the Chair.
(Whereupon, at 1 p. m., the hearing was adjourned, to resume upon
the call of the Chair.)
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE
LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
TUESDAY, MARCH 21, 1950
United States Senate,
Committee on Foreign Relations,
Subcommittee Appointed Under Senate Resolution 231,
Washington, D. C.
executi\t: session
The subcommittee met, pursuant to call at 2 : 30 p. m. in room G-23,
United States Capitol, Senator Millard E. Tydings (chairman of the
subcommittee) presidino;.
Present : Senators Tydings (chairman of the subcommittee), Green,
McMalion, and Hickenlooper.
Also present : Senator McCarthy,
Senator Tydings, This meetino; has been called by the chairman,
after conferring with Senator McCarthy, so that Senator McCarthy
might give to the committee the name of the very important person
in the State Department concerning whom he desired to give the com-
mittee information, and Senator McCarthy is here and ready to
proceed.
Senator McCarthy. There is nothing mysterious about this one.
This is the case of Owen Lattimore. This has all been put in the
record already, plus some exhibits.
You understand when I talk about what you will find in the files,
this is to the best of my knowledge.
Senator Tydings, That is right.
Now, particularly, you are meaning the loyalty file in this matter?
Senator McCarthy, I don't know what part of this you will find in
the loyalty file.
Senator Tydings, How about the Civil Service file?
Senator McCarthy. I understand that the Civil Service Commis-
sion has in its file what ultimately goes in the loyalty file. The bene-
fit of getting the Civil Services file as well as the State Department
loyalty file is largely because in that way you have some check as to
what is in the State Department loyalty file,
I might say on that, even assuming that there is no attempt to
rifle the State Department loyalty files, assuming they are protect-
ing them as fully as they can, the system of filing them is such that it
is entirely possible that you will find many things missing from the
loyalty file which are in the Civil Service Commission file, but actually
there should be the same material in the State Department loyalty file
that is in the Civil Service file.
277
278 STATE DiEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY ENVEISTIGATION
To get to this fellow Lattimore, for Lattimore's stuff I think you
will have to rely quite largely upon the FBI file.
Senator McMahon. Have you contacted Hoover? Is Hoover in
favor of displaying the FBI files ?
Senator McCarthy. I wouldn't know.
(Discussion of Mr. Lattimore was continued off the record.)
Senator Tydings. It appears that he was once an adviser of Chiang
Kai-shek. Then, when last year the State Department "'white paper"
was written it actively reflected the thinking of Mr. Lattimore. In
the Atlantic Monthly, Mr. Lattimore wrote, "Sound policy would
avoid premature excessive strategic development in the Far East."
Again, "United States policy should aim to increase the ability of
countries in Asia to do witliout Russia." Again, "For the problem of
recognition of the new Government of China, the United Nations
offers the ideal avenue to a solution. If a majority of the non-Com-
munist countries in Europe, Latin America and Asia should vote to
seat the new Chinese representative (meaning Communist) to the
United Nations, the LTnited States should not vote against that ver-
dict," and so on and so on.
That is from the New York World-Telegram and Sun of the 15th
of March 1950.
Senator McCarthy. That gives you some of his background.
He has also written a considerable amount. In case j^ou care to
get some of his writings, he wrote a l)ook, Solution In Asia. I
haven't read it at all. I have a few excerpts from it. He wrote for
Pacific Affairs. But this is entirely separate and apart from his
writings. As I say, when I give you this information it is to the
best of my knowledge, and I am absolutely confident that this is the
case that you really should find — well, it's explosive. If you crack this
case it will be the iDiggest espionage case in the history of this country.
That is my own personal thought on it.
He has been over in Baltimore, as you know, with Johns Hopkins.
I don't know when he has been on the payroll of the State Depart-
ment. I uiiderstand that he has very free access to a desk there and
access to all the files, and comes in whenever he cares to.
Jessup has had a very close relationship with Lattimore. I per-
sonally think that Jessup does not have the slightest conception of
what Lattimore is doing. I think that Jessup thinks that Lattimore
is a liberal individual who feels perhaps that Communist Russia is
more accurate than most of us feel Russia is. Beyond that I don't
have anything that indicates that Jessup has the picture of Latti-
more's activities, but I do think the files will show you that Lattimore
has been using Jessup to do the things which he, Lattimore, himself
couldn't do.
Lattimore is now, as I understand, over in the Khyber Pass. As I
say, on this your information will be a lot more accurate than mine.
I do not think he is on the payroll of the Department of State or any
Government agency. I understand that he was invited over by the
Afghanistan Government. Khyber Pass, as you know, is the one
route from Russia over to the new area. What he is doing there I
don't know. I do not think the files will show anything as of now
definitely of what he is doing, because any information they will get
on that will be after a considerable lapse of time.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVEISTIGATION 279
That is about the entire picture, that his files — the FBI files — I think
^yi]l just <i'ive you the one case.
Senator ]\Icj\Iaiion. Have you seen the FBI files.
Senator McCarthy. I think I know what is in them.
Senator McMahon. That is not the question. Have you seen them ?
Senator McCarthy. I will tell you. Senator McMahon, do not worry
about whether I have seen them or not.
Senator McMahon. I am worried. You will either answer or you
will not. You have or you have not.
Senator Tydings. Nobody is going to ask for your sources.
Senator McCarthy^. Senator McMahon, let me tell you this.
Senator McMahon. Do not tell me anything. I am not interested
in a single thing. That technique you have is not going to work on me.
If you cannot answer the question, that you have or you have not, then
I am not interested in anything else you are going to say. That is
the question : Have you seen the FBI file or have you not?
Senator IMcCarthy. I heard your question.
Senator Tydings. Let me say this
Senator McMahon. You refuse to answer?
Senator McCarthy. No ; I don't refuse to answer.
Senator Tydings. We do not want to know your sources. But what
I think we are entitled to know is, is this a speculation or liaA^e you
had some contact with the files in one way or another that makes you
think you have some accurate information ?
Senator McCarthy. I am about as certain as I could be of anything
as to what those files will show. As to whether I have seen them, who
might have helped me get information, or things like that
Senator Tydings. I do not want to know that.
Senator McCarthy. I know you do not.
Senator McMahon. Let me point out that that is a very material
question. I want to make my question clear. We have not had any
decision from the executive department as to whether we are going to
see the FBI files. If the Senator from Wisconsin /is permitted the
FBI files, then I do not know why this committee should not be per-
mitted to see the FBI files.
Senator Ty'dings. I would rather think, from what he has already
said, that he has talked with somebody who has seen the files in whom
he has confidence. I think it would help our investigation, and I have
no ultei'ior pur])ose to serve except frankness and honest.y as far as it is
possible, and I assure you it comes from the heart: I think you
might say, "I haven't personally seen the files, but I know a man who
has seen the files whose name I won't disclose, in which I have confi-
dence, v.iio tells me this and that and the other thing is in the files."
In other words, it will help us in our investigation if you will testify
along that line.
Senator McCarthy. I thiidc that is a very reasonable request, and
I might say that I have not seen the original FBI files.
Senator McMahon. The original FBI files. Have you seen a copy
of them ?
Senator McCarthy. I think. Senator, wliether I have seen a copy or
not, not having seen the original I would have no way of knoAving
whether I saw a copy unless I compared it with the original.
68970 — 50 — pt. 1 19
280 STATE DEPARTME?\T EMPLOYEE LOYALTY IX\"ElSTIGATION
Senator Tydings. Have you seen what purports to be a copy, or have
you got your evidence from somebody who has seen the files? That
is alL
Senator McCarthy. Let me say this. To the best of my knowledge^
and I think it is good, I think it has been proven so far in dates and
places that I have been giving the committee, the FBI file will show
in detail not the case merely of a man who happens to favor Russia,
not the case of a man who may disagree with what we think about
Russia, but a man who is definitely an espionage agent.
Senator McMaiion. See how he goes away from the question?
Senator Tydings. He has tried to answer it. Let me say this. He
has said this : He has said he has not seen the files, but he said if we
saw the files he has reason to believe that this, that, and the other
tiling he is going to outline would be in the files. I would like him
to say that. I do not want him to give away anything: I do not Avant
him to name anybody ; I do not want to know his sources and do not
want him to do any of that.
Senator McMahon. Neither do I.
Senator Tydings. But I would like to knoAv if you have seen what
purports to be a copy of the file or whether someone in whom you have
confidence has seen the file and the following things are likely to
turn up there. That is all.
Senator McCarthy. I know this
Senator Tydings. I cannot see where there is anv harm in answering
that question.
Senator McCarthy. It is the source of my information. If divulg-
ing that would actually aid in getting at the facts in the Lattimore
case you would have it.
Senator Tydings. I will not ask you for the source.
Senator McCarthy. I will stretch a point a long way if the com-
mittee thinks information will be of benefit. Even though I do not
think so, I will go as far as I can in getting the information. But
where we have something that clearly, in my opinion, will be of no
benefit to the committee in arriving at the facts, then I just think it
is a waste of time to go into those things.
Senator Tydings. Listen ; I do not want to get your sources, and I
will never ask you intentionally to disclose any of the sources that
fortify you in what you want to say.
Senator McCarthy. I appreciate that.
Senator Tydings. I do not want to know it by indirection ; I do not
want to put anybody on the trail to find out. I am not interested
in that.
Senator McMahon. Let me add that I feel the same Avay.
Senator Tydinc.s. But I am interested in knoAving whether or not
you have seen a copy of the files or whether or not somebody told you
what was in the files, simply as a means of Aveighing tlie credence of
Avhat you say. That is not goinir to stop us from looking at any files
we can get hold of. Do you understand me ?
But suppose I get hold of the files after this hearing and find
nothing in them, just to illustrate. I would want to ask why certain
papers are not in those files. Do you see my point ?
Senator McCarthy. I do ; yes.
Let me say this, and I am certainly not trying to avoid your ques-
tion. I do not knoAv if you have had any experience with the FBI
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 281
files or not. Tliev are serialized and numbered. You could take
things out of those files. It would be extremely difl'cult.
In the Kansas City case, wliich was not made public, I do not
believe, some of the FBI files were obtained, and it did appear that a
sizable number of documents had been removed. But the staff ap-
parently — Flanagan and Rogers, I believe, were on the staff — had no
difficulty at all detecting the number of documents that were removed.
1 think fortunateh' we did nothing about that publicly.
I was giving a picture of the files. As I recall, the evidence was
that Hoover did not know anything about any removals, and such
like. I merely mention that to show you if you get those files I do not
think you will have any trouble at all knowing what is in them,
I have not talked to Hoover about this. If I did, I do not suppose
lie would give nie the information.
Senator Tydixgs. I haven't either.
Senator McCarthy. I think if, as chairman of this committee, you
take this testimony over to him and say "Is this substantially true?"
with the respect I have for Hoover I am sure he won't lie to you.
I want to make it very clear that Mr. Hoover has not given me any
information himself of any kind from the files.
Senator Tyt)Ings. I know that.
All that I am asking you is this. I do not want to know the
source. I would appreciate it if you would tell me whether or not
you have seen — and it is not difficult to see a great many documents
that are secret — what purports to be a co])y of the files. You have
said, I know, you have not seen the files: or wether someone in whom
you have confidence has said, "I believe you will find this stuff in the
files." That is all I want to know, just "yes" or "no," and you can go
on with your story. There can't be any harm done by that question.
It does not say who told you. I don't want to know that. I just
would like to know the method.
Senator McCarthy. I hope 3''ou don't push that question. You
ask that question ; the next question, of course, if I were questioning
and if I did want to find out what the sources were, would be "Have
you seen a photostat?" Then, "How large a document was it?"
Senator Tydixgs. I will not ask you any of those questions.
Senator McCarthy. Anything that I would give you I think would
tend to disclose the source of my information. I do not think the
committee sliould ask for that.
Senator Hickenlooper. Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask Senator
McCarthy this question : Are the sources of your information which
you have alleged here with regard to Mr. Lattimore and what is con-
tained in his file, in 3-our opinicm and judgment, of sufficient reliability
so that you rely ui)on them utterly and sincerely in basing your
allegations:*
Senator McCarthy. That's right, and I am absolutely convinced
beyond any doubt that if the committee sees that file they will agree
with me wholeheartedly that I have perhaps understated the case
rather than overstated it.
Senator Tydings, I am as sincei'e as any man can be in this case.
This man is the top of the Avhole ring of which Hiss was a part. I
think you will find this: I think you will find that Stephen Brun-
auer — and as I say I do not have the definiteness about this that I have
about the others — is tied up with that ring, and the No. 1 case that I
282 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVEISTIGATION
gave 3-011, Herbert Fierst, That was the No. 1 case of the 81. He, in-
cidentally, was post-audited by the Civil Service Commission the same
as Service, and they sent it back to the State Department, I under-
stand — the State Department Loyalty Board. Just what they re-
quested I don't know, but they expressed dissatisfaction, and I under-
stand the State Department Loyalty Board shortly after marked
the case "Closed.'-
As I say, I do not feel my source of information on this is as re-
liable as the stuff on Lattimore. I believe, however, that you will
undoubtedly find that Fierst and Brunauer are tied up with Latti-
more in this case.
Senator McMahon. Can I ask a question : You apparently thought
what I was trying to do w^as to get your source, in which I am not
interested at all. I wish to point out to you that if the files are open
to you as a Senator, as apparently they must be, because you tell us
what is in the FBI files, it is very material for us to know that in
making our I'equest for a look at the same files, because if they are going
to be opened to Senator McCarthy they certainly ought to be open
to a Senate connnittee. So much for that.
Now let me ask you this question about Lattimore:
Senatoi' Tydings. Before you leave that, I want to serve notice here
on every man in this committee, and in your presence, that I am going
to do everything that I can do to get every file that is requested.
The reason I am proceeding as I am is that the precedents show clearly
that if I issue a subpena they can turn it down and there is nothing I
can do about it. What I want to do is get the files. Anything that you
can say or do that puts me in a position to get those files is going to
help 3'ou to prove 3^our case, assuming that these facts as you allege
them are true.
Now, if you do not give me something to go on, if I want to go to
Hoover and show hiui this testimony, if I say "I want you to read
this," I want to ask you if you can devise a way wliei-e I can verify
this or not. Unfortunately Mr. Hoover, for this hearing, has taken
the position, so I am well advised although I have not talked with him,
that the minute he ever discloses one of the FBI files in the future if
he goes to somebody for an interview about John Smith, the person,
knowing that the files were subsequently opened, is going to refuse
to be as frank with him as he would otherwise be, and he is scared
of it.
I understand by the grapevine — I have nothing fi-om the White
Llouse and nothing from any source except general gossip — that
Hoover is protesting against tiie opening of any of these files, because
FBI reports are in the loyalty files.
Senator McMahon. But Mr. Hoover certainly will have to recog-
nize
Senator Tydings. Hoover is no softv, and he isn't "oino- to do this
unless we can show him a particular circumstance that will justify
him in making an exception. Mark my words !
Senator McMaiion. But mark my words on this: If Mr. Hoover's
files are going to be divulged to Senator McCarthy, and by him the
contents of them to the press, then certainly the reason why we
should not get them falls to the ground, because the Senator has
made this charge against Lattimore. True, he did not attach his
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 283
name to it last nig:ht, but he has made this charge. He has made it
on the basis of the FBI files.
NoAv, so louo- as a charge has been made on the basis of the files,
I don't see how they are going to keej) that FBI file away from ns.
Therefore it is very material to find out whether the Senator from
"Wisconsin actually did have access to those files.
Now, whethei- he physically had the file in his office or in his hands
does not make a bit of dilTerence. But did somebody read the file,
somebody in a position of trust in the FBI, and give it' to the Senator,
or did he show him copies of the files?
That is why I thought it was very material to us to know the
answer to that question.
Senator Tydings. I agree with you.
Senator McMahon. I would like to ask the Senator one further
question right along that ]K)int.
Senator, in all of this information regarding Lattimore, which you
say is so patent, which demonstrates him to be a bad egg, is there
anything in your information to indicate that the Federal Bureau
of luA^estigation turned over his case to any district attorney or to
the Attorney General or to the Assistant Attorney General for prose-
cution ^
Senator McCarthy. I frankly do not know what the top men of
the Department think on the subject of whether or not the case
is ready for criminal action. I know this. I know that there are
some who are aware of at least some of the facts — at least this is
my best information — who feel that the case is ready for prosecution.
I think you will find some in the Department who feel that the
evidence is gotten in such a fashion that while it proves the guilt, it
may not be in such shape that it could be presented in court.
Senator Tydixgs. The answer is "No," that you do not know it has
been turned over to anj^body for prosecution up to now ?
Senator McCarthy. Here is my thought on that, and I do not know
too much about the procedure. I do not believe that they ever turn
a case over. I think it is discussed with the Justice Department and
somebody in Justice who is interested is kept apprised of the facts
as they develop, and I believe that the attorneys over in Justice, in
the Justice Department, are the ones who decide when they will take
the case and start prosecution.
Senator McMahon. That is not entirely true. It is sort of a mixed
question. I mean by that that it is a mixed decision. It is true that
in some cases the daily reports or weekly reports go forward to the
Criminal Division. In other cases, according to my memory — of
course this is 10 years ago or more- — they go through as they finish a
case.
The Justice Department, at least while I was there, did not under-
take a prosecution unless the investigative department said "We have
completed the investigation and we are through. In other words, we
have done all we can."
If you did not have that system in force you would find that you
would be springing cases with only half of the case being investigated,
springing them publicly, and I think it is very material to me to
know, you see, and very important to know, whether this case has been
turned over to the Criminal Division by the FBI as a. completed
284 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE, LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
matter, or whether it is still in process between the Division and the
FBI.
Senator Tydings. That w^ould be a matter of record, and all you are
asking Senator McCarthy is. Does he know whether or not the matter
has been put in tlie hands of the Department of Justice or any branch
thereof for prosecution, and I take it from his answer that so far as
he is advised, he does not know.
Senator McCarthy. That is correct.
Senator McMahon. You do not charge any dereliction in the prose-
cution forces of the Department? Do you charge any dereliction,
from your present knowledge of the case, in the nonprosecution of
the case ?
Senator McCarthy. The answer to that is "No,"' for the reason that
I do not know what the men in charge consider sutRcient evidence to
prosecute. One of the reasons why I wanted to take this in executive
session is that it is entirely possible when you talk to Mr. Hoover or
someone you may find that they feel they have a case that they could
prosecute but they want this man, for all I know, left in the Depart-
ment so they can follow up other leads.
Senator McMahon. You see, that is very important to our inves-
tigation, to know^ whether there is any charge
(Discussion was continued off the record.)
Senator Tydings. Wliat we want to know is this : Why do you think,
in addition to what you have told us, that this man Lattimore is a bad
fellow and the head of a spy ring, and so on ? Wliat makes you think
that yourself ?
Senator McCarthy. I think this :
(Discussion was continued off the record.)
Senator Green. I ha^e been trying to listen and find out, but I have
not yet found out, what the charge is.
Senator McCarthy. I think he is one of the top espionage agents.
This man, I think, is one of the top espionage agents. If it is neces-
sary — it may be, under your resolution — for you to charge him with
being that, I will be glad to do it. In my opinion he is, and I don't
know wdiat kind of charge I should make, but I will be glad to make
any charge that is necessary.
I am very serious about this. One of the reasons I hope you get this
file is that I think it will dispel in the minds of some of the members
of the committee this feeling: Some of them, I believe, have had the
honest feeling that this was being done for political purposes. I
think if I did not bring this forth I would be completely derelict in my
duty, and I think after you see this case then we will be able to sit
down and just man-to-man across the table discuss the other cases
a lot more freely. In other words, if you get this, this will prove that
I am completely wrong or it will prove I am 100 percent riglit. If it
proves I am lOO percent right, I know in your mind no longer will
there be any suspicion, as I think you have had that and most likely
honestly so, that this was being done for political purposes. If you
find I am right about Lattimore, then I think that a lot of the suspicion
we have had flowing back and forth in this committee will be com-
pletely dispelled and I think we can go ahead and do a good job.
Senator Tydings. You think Lattimore is one of the biggest?
Senator McCarthy. By far and away.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVEISTIGATION 285
Senator Green. What do you claim he has done to show that?
Why do you tliink so ?
Senator McCarthy. I think he is the top Russian spy.
Senator Greex. Why do you think so 'i I thought you were going
to give us some evidence.
Senator Tydixgs. Let me just say this
Senator Green. If you do not want me to pursue my question, I
will leave.
Senator McCarthy. Because I think the files will show he has
been contacting and giving material to Russian espionage agents as
part of an espionage ring.
Senator Green. I want to know if that is anything more than a
suspicion on your part.
Senator McCarthy. There is a firm conviction from all of the in-
formation that I can get that that will be in the files. If, when you get
that file, it is not there, you will know that there is not too much to
my claim.
Senator Green. You suspect that there is information in the file,
but you do not know what, which shall sustain your belief ?
Senator McCarthy. No; that is not right, Senator.
Senator Green. Correct me. I am trying to find out what you
really mean.
Senator McCarthy. I do not suspect. I am firmly convinced that
I know that the Lattimore file, the FBI file, will convince you the
same way I am now convinced, that you are dealing with the top
espionage agent.
Senator Green. Have you any facts that convince you of that ?
Senator McCarthy. Yes ; I think you will find in that file
Senator Green. They are in your mind, too ; aren't they, now ?
Senator McCarthy. I am giving you the benefit of all my investi-
gation.
Senator Green. Yes, but you are just giving me the conclusions.
Your conclusions must be based on certain facts that have been brought
to your attention, and I was wondering whether you were going to
give us those facts.
Senator McCarthy. I am trying to give them to you. Can we have
an agreement that I can complete my answer before I am interrupted?
(Tlie reporter reread the pending question.)
Senator McCarthy. The fact is that to the best of my knowledge
the file will show the complete workings of an espionage ring. That
is the best I can give you, Senator. I have not been able to run down
till the vast amount of work that the Government investigative agen-
cies have been doing. I am telling you tluit this is the one case in
which I think we can easily have a determination by this committee
.'is to whetlier or not my charges are well-founded or not. I think for
the balance of tlie investigation you should know that. If I am com-
])letely mistaken on this case, then you can assume that many of the
other cases
Senator Tydings. This is the key ?
Senator McCarthy. Yes, sir; and when you see that file. Senator
Oreen, I am sure that you will agree with me wholeheartedly.
Senator Green. Let me ask the question again in another way.
Have you any evidence that ]iroduces conviction in 3'our mind that he
delivered confidential papers to an enemy ?
286 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY rNVESTIGATION
Senator McCarthy. I frankly cannot even come remotely complete
in giving you the case yon would have in the file. I think you have
simply got to get that file. I don't think I can give you enough ma-
terial to make out a criminal case with the investigation I have. All
I can tell you, Senator, is ^Yhat, to the best of my knowledge, is in
those files.
Senator Green. If that is all, it seems to me that my designation
of it as suspicion is in your mind a conviction. It seems to me you
must have some facts upon which to base it.
Senator McCarthy. You might call it a suspicion ; I call it a con-
viction. We have a different name for it, apparently.
Senator Tydings. What I get out of it is this: That you have a con-
viction, based on certain things that you have seen or heard, which
lead you to the conclusion that if these files are examined, evidence
will be found to show that this man is the keyman in a Russian es-
pionage ring.
Senator McMahon. He is a traitor.
Senator McCarthy. That is putting it pretty well. I think he is.
Senator Tydings. Furthermore, I get this out of the combined col-
loquy that has gone on, that without disclosing how you have that
conviction, information has come to you which leads you to that
conclusion.
The next thing I get out of it is that the information has come to you
in a way you do not care to disclose — information which supports the
position that you have taken.
Senator McCarthy. Yes.
Senator Tydings. The next thing